PDA

View Full Version : Newsweek Article


Yar-El
02-08-2009, 04:15 PM
Newsweek Article - Why There Won’t Be a Revolution (http://www.newsweek.com/id/183718)

The poor you will always have, the good book says, but as for the rich man, he will wither away like a delicate flower in the midday sun. The first prediction has certainly been borne out, but the second part (James 1:11) had not yet come to pass by the Panic of 1907, when Theodore Roosevelt warned of a coming reckoning against the "malefactors of great wealth." Nor by 1990, when former Nixon aide Kevin Phillips predicted that Americans would rise to extract revenge on "the rich who got the benefits of the go-go years" of the 1980s. As late as 2001, no less an authority than, uh, NEWSWEEK wrote in the wake of 9/11 that "the arrogant wheeler-dealer ordering a $600 bottle of wine with dinner … has vanished utterly as an icon," which remained true until approximately 2002. Well, listen up, you rich guys, this time we really mean it. The president himself is repelled by your rapacious greed, your kids are ashamed to admit that their mom is a banker, even your girlfriends are sick of your whining about your bonus, and you're going to have to learn to live on $500,000 a year like a normal person. Oh, and by the way, nice watch. Is it Cartier?
I completely disagree with the reason behind why the upcoming revolution will be exclusively about class. I have seen and read enough to believe the next revolution will be about those who are corrupt and those who are patriots. Almost everyone in politics, massmedia, and in corporations are corrupt. Each is pushing for a stake in controlling how we think, walk, eat, and breath. I truely think we are going to have a revolution in the very near future; however, I don't think the massmedia is ready to be blamed for being apart of the problem.

If you post in this forum it is free for everyone to reply, or I will simply lock the thread, you are of course free to only answer Americans ;) I shall stay out of the thread, accept for moderation purposes now as of your request - j7

jrrtoken
02-08-2009, 04:35 PM
It depends on how a "revolution" should be interpreted. If you mean a revolution against the state by rogue organizations, i.e., guerrilla warfare, then I doubt that would happen in the US, or anywhere else in the Western world.

First, no one is being persecuted to the breaking point. There are reasons why Batista, Pahlavi, and Nicolas II all faced revolution; they were complete despots. They controlled the population with fear absolute authority, which really has not happened in America.

Additionally, it's an unfortunate fact that most Americans are either too lazy or ignorant to resort to protests and eventually violence against the state.

Oh, and nice try disguising this thread. We all know who it's really about... (It starts with an "O" and ends with an "a") :dozey:

Yar-El
02-08-2009, 04:54 PM
It depends on how a "revolution" should be interpreted. If you mean a revolution against the state by rogue organizations, i.e., guerrilla warfare, then I doubt that would happen in the US, or anywhere else in the Western world.

First, no one is being persecuted to the breaking point. There are reasons why Batista, Pahlavi, and Nicolas II all faced revolution; they were complete despots. They controlled the population with fear absolute authority, which really has not happened in America.

Additionally, it's an unfortunate fact that most Americans are either too lazy or ignorant to resort to protests and eventually violence against the state.
Wrong! The American Revolution was not exclusively about persecution. We have also hit a breaking point in US history. People are extremely motivated by the corruption in politics, corporations, and massmedia. Listen to what people are saying. We have politicians scaring people with war, high taxes, and economic decline. I don't think we will resort to protests due to the realization they don't work. Action is the only other course.

Oh, and nice try disguising this thread. We all know who it's really about... (It starts with an "O" and ends with an "a") :dozey:
Is this a new thing now? Someone has a opinion in contradiction to a selected group, and then they yell, "FOUL!" Where did you get Obama from? I'm talking about a all out revolution between the corrupt and uncorrupt.

jonathan7
02-08-2009, 04:57 PM
Is this a new thing now? Someone has a opinion in contradiction to a selected group, and then they yell, "FOUL!" Where did you get Obama from?

That's not new, its been going on since Time immemorial.

There won't be a revolution due to the fact the FBI/CIA and the Army ultimately, wouldn't allow it.

Yar-El
02-08-2009, 04:59 PM
That's not new, its been going on since Time immemorial.

There won't be a revolution due to the fact the FBI/CIA and the Army ultimately, wouldn't allow it.
There are laws that prevent them from being involved.

The Posse Comitatus Act & Insurrection Act of 1807.

I think people are feeling truely enraged.

jonathan7
02-08-2009, 05:02 PM
There are laws that prevent them from being involved.

The Posse Comitatus Act & Insurrection Act of 1807

Do you really think all these "corrupt" politicians would allow themselves to loose power over a 200 year old law. Nor do I think the dynamics are anywhere near bad enough for a revolution, America has seen much worse times off without one.

Revolutions are only successful if you have control of a vital asset - the army, nor do I think people are nearly as angry over the super rich as you think...

Yar-El
02-08-2009, 05:06 PM
Do you really think all these "corrupt" politicians would allow themselves to loose power over a 200 year old law. Nor do I think the dynamics are anywhere near bad enough for a revolution, America has seen much worse times off without one.
Things have changed over the years. 53% of our fellow Americans hired someone who was not a Washington insider.

jonathan7
02-08-2009, 05:08 PM
Things have changed over the years. 53% of our fellow Americans hired someone who was not a Washington insider.

I'm not American ;) Things do change, but I highly doubt there will be a revolution, not least because nearly all the Americans I know are not angry enough to even want one.

Yar-El
02-08-2009, 05:11 PM
I'm not American ;) Things do change, but I highly doubt there will be a revolution, not least because nearly all the Americans I know are not angry enough to even want one.
You and I don't have anything to say to each other on this topic. Another American Revolution doesn't directly affect you; thus, there is no longer any need for you and I to debate on the subject.

I will wait until an American Citizen chimes in.

Darth Avlectus
02-08-2009, 05:17 PM
I'm American.

I disagree with a revolution being entirely about class as the article says. I can see it being more about outrage for some reason or another. We've already begun numerous threads of why, pointing to this as a conclusion.

Patriots vs corrupt intenrational weasels? OK. I can go with that.
Yeah, whoever heard of an honest politician?
Media...yeah it's about time they got their spanking...
Likely, if the banks and economic system melt down and collapse. That is the most plausible main reason. That and someone finally succeeds in undoing our constitution. Which, there are some who wish to do that, in secrecy.


--Still going to play devil's advocate here: I mean I know people generally don't mean well...but come on. World collapse? I know it's gonna suck for us here in the states if/when something boils over, that much I won't deny--but the whole world?


Oh, and nice try disguising this thread. We all know who it's really about... (It starts with an "O" and ends with an "a")

Down, boy! Down! Seriously why does everyone assume in the least it's all about Obama? He's just a man--furthermore I think the article in question is concentrating on an issue--not a person (even if there may be a relationship between them). >_>

No more of this Obama crap, fanboys, fangirls, and critics.

jonathan7
02-08-2009, 05:17 PM
You and I don't have anything to say to each other on this topic. Another American Revolution doesn't directly affect you; thus, there is no longer any need for you and I to debate on the subject.

I will wait until an American Citizen chimes in.

Of course it directly affects me, America is the worlds only super power, and her influence is felt all over the world in a million and one different ways. You don't have to respond to my posts, if somehow, my reasoning doesn't count as I'm not American. I would suggest if you want to debate this with *only* Americans, you might want to post it in a forum, where you can only enter if you are American. Last time I checked Lucas Forums was multi national, and if you happen to post in this forum, all nationals are welcome to comment on any subject.

Darth Avlectus
02-08-2009, 05:21 PM
Of course it directly affects me, America is the worlds only super power, and her influence is felt all over the world in a million and one different ways. I have my doubts--but if you care to disprove me, I will indulge you.


You don't have to respond to my posts, if somehow, my reasoning doesn't count as I'm not American. I would suggest if you want to debate this with *only* Americans, you might want to post it in a forum, where you can only enter if you are American. Last time I checked Lucas Forums was multi national, and if you happen to post in this forum, all nationals are welcome to comment on any subject.

MMh.. I'd say Americans are beginning to get a bit restless. Like you said: Maybe not near angry enough yet. Still, I wouldn't ignore it.

Yar-El
02-08-2009, 05:23 PM
I have my doubts--but if you care to disprove me, I will indulge you.

MMh.. I'd say Americans are beginning to get a bit restless. Like you said: Maybe not near angry enough yet. Still, I wouldn't ignore it.
I'm also betting on the military support for the people. Our military is growing restless as well; thus, I think they will support a fight to protect constitutional law. America doesn't seem to be living in a world of everything is normal.

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-08-2009, 05:24 PM
You and I don't have anything to say to each other on this topic. Another American Revolution doesn't directly affect you; thus, there is no longer any need for you and I to debate on the subject.

I will wait until an American Citizen chimes in.I'm an American citizen and j7 was right and you are pretty silly to say that a second American revolution wouldn't affect anyone else.

jonathan7
02-08-2009, 05:26 PM
I have my doubts--but if you care to disprove me, I will indulge you.

America has the biggest military in the world; we have a duel presence in both Iraq and Afghanistan, should there be a revolution, the Army could well be put into disarary. And as such, that effects our troop, and has an effect on Britain. Ergo; I'm affected.

Should there be a revolution, the already fragile Financial markets would be hit by further freefall; ergo I'm affected.

America is the worlds biggest donate of aid; if there is a revolution that could change, ergo any country needed aid is affected.

On a personal level; I have American family - if there is a revolution that would cause me to be worried and affected.

Do you really want me to go on?

Astor
02-08-2009, 05:29 PM
I don't see a Revolution happening in this day and age, to be honest, especially in the US.

If revolution were as imminent as is claimed, surely we all (and I include people of all nationalities in this) would have seen something of this?

Yar-El
02-08-2009, 05:34 PM
I'm an American citizen and j7 was right and you are pretty silly to say that a second American revolution wouldn't affect anyone else.
You are right in your analysis. An American Revolution would affect the world; however, it would not feel its affects in a direct way. Sure, we can argue how the lack of world assistance may causes unrest; nevertheless, no one in another country will feel the brunt force of an all out revolution. Not immediately anyway.

Comments about if people are on an ignore list or not are considered against Kavars rules. Though you cannot put me on your ignore list due to the fact I'm a moderator ;) - j7

I also can't keep you out of my posts. :xp:

jrrtoken
02-08-2009, 05:45 PM
You and I don't have anything to say to each other on this topic. Another American Revolution doesn't directly affect you; thus, there is no longer any need for you and I to debate on the subject.

I will wait until an American Citizen chimes in.Think of it this way: A revolution in a country like Micronesia would be like throwing a pebble in a lake; small ripples spread throughout the water. A revolution in a superpower such as America would be like a kilometer-wide meteor hurtling at the lake at several thousand kilometers-an-hour, instantly throwing water up into the air, instantly vaporizing it, while creating a massive impact crater.

An armed revolution in any western nation would ultimately dramatically effect the world, leaving the global economy in shambles, enticing other more enthusiastic nations to potentially gobble up adjacent territory, and possibly triggering a world-wide conflict, which might turn nuclear.

This domino effect has been seen in the past, especially form the Great Depression, and how that effected essentially all of Europe. Of course, that was in 1929, when the world was still rather isolated. Today, the entire world is interconnected through many different factors, essentially impossible to reverse.
You are right in your analysis. An American Revolution would affect the world; however, it would not feel its affects in a direct way. Sure, we can argue how the lack of world assistance may causes unrest; nevertheless, no one in another country will feel the brunt force of an all out revolution. Not immediately anyway.No, it would immediately effect the world. Not only is isolation virtually impossible today, we also have instant access to knowledge and information via the Internets. Any news of a revolution would get out quickly, causing economists and investors to scramble and panic, probably triggering a crash in the stock market, as in 1929. Either way, the world will be affected almost immediately.

mur'phon
02-08-2009, 05:48 PM
J7 is un-ignorable, partly due to being a nice wordsmith, partly due to being a mod.

Not feel the effects imediately? My countries are Russia and Norway, and an American revolution might well lead to a rather imediate occupation of the latter by the former, which would affect me in a majorly bad way (would make paperwork a breeze though:xp:).

Anyway, I can't see a revolution due to corruption, sure, America does have corruption, but it is nothing in a global sense. Besides, a country with fairly functual governmental institutions, a fairly well off population and little oppression gives the people little reason to want a revolution, as well as making one nigh on impossible to pull off.

Yar-El
02-08-2009, 05:52 PM
Think of it this way: A revolution in a country like Micronesia would be like throwing a pebble in a lake; small ripples spread throughout the water. A revolution in a superpower such as America would be like a kilometer-wide meteor hurtling at the lake at several thousand kilometers-an-hour, instantly throwing water up into the air, instantly vaporizing it, while creating a massive impact crater.

An armed revolution in any western nation would ultimately dramatically effect the world, leaving the global economy in shambles, enticing other more enthusiastic nations to potentially gobble up adjacent territory, and possibly triggering a world-wide conflict, which might turn nuclear.

This domino effect has been seen in the past, especially form the Great Depression, and how that effected essentially all of Europe. Of course, that was in 1929, when the world was still rather isolated. Today, the entire world is interconnected through many different factors, essentially impossible to reverse.
Has the United States really become an empire? Do other people think this way? How can a Revolutionary War in the US be globally effective? I didn't think we had a global impact in such a scale.

Arcesious
02-08-2009, 05:53 PM
I'm an American, and I think people are overreacting. It isn't that bad. The problem with America is that it is too divided. Remember George Washinton's Farewell Address? He was spot on about pretty much everything, especially his warnings about Political Parties and Government spending.

America is, as Kreia would say:

[...] a stagnant beast that labors for breath...

I also quote:

Divided we fail.

The problem is only partially connected to the wealthy people of the country, it is composed of tons of problems and issues that hold it back and starve it from its potential.

I dont think there'll be any revolution. People are just going to keep whining and complaining, but it won't do anything. The country will keep going, slowly and painfully, deteriorating and bulding itself back up, until someone steps up and really gets things moving.

Still, it could be worse. But it's not going to get much worse. It's just going to keep going and going and going, having its ups and downs as usual...

jrrtoken
02-08-2009, 06:02 PM
Has the United States really become an empire?Uh..... yeah. Ever heard of something called the Cold War?
Do other people think this way?I'm sure not willingly, but denying the superpower status of the US would be quite ignorant.
How can a Revolutionary War in the US be globally effective?The global economy, especially the oil industry, would be dramatized with having their number one buyer thrown into anarchy.
I didn't think we had a global impact in such a scale.Ever heard of the Great Depression?

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-08-2009, 06:02 PM
Has the United States really become an empire? Do other people think this way? How can a Revolutionary War in the US be globally effective? I didn't think we had a global impact in such a scale.hmm yase i dont know anything about this issue perhaps i shall comment upon it regardless

Yar-El
02-08-2009, 06:03 PM
You don't think people are boiling over? I keep hearing about another Revolution. I normally ignore people who say such things; however, you can't ignore the radio, tv, and internet these days. Something is boiling beneath the surface. You can feel it.

Darth Avlectus
02-08-2009, 06:06 PM
America has the biggest military in the world; we have a duel presence in both Iraq and Afghanistan, should there be a revolution, the Army could well be put into disarary. And as such, that effects our troop, and has an effect on Britain. Ergo; I'm affected.
Taken.

Should there be a revolution, the already fragile Financial markets would be hit by further freefall; ergo I'm affected. Okay. I can see where you're coming from on an individual level...but on a larger level...I still have doubts. You mean to tell me other wealthy nations (namely those in europe) would be unable to stand on their own sufficiently if something happened to the US? I know the financial situations are volatile--but I have a hard time believing it would become financially so dire if things went to hell in USA. You really mean to tell me if the financial sector broke here, that places like yours would experience a crisis like a depression?

--However I do share your sentiment that if the goniffs high on the food chain do something to rock the boat like take all the money and run --for office or their hideout-- then they ought to be dealt with. How 'dealt with' is another subject not entirely relevant--you get my point here I think.

America is the worlds biggest donate of aid; if there is a revolution that could change, ergo any country needed aid is affected.

Wasn't sure. Actually thank you, that's good to hear--the nauseating America bashers in this country who live here would have you believe otherwise. Seriously. --That is good news. Thanks. :)

However: Greed here is still higher than I ever remember it in my life. On all levels.

On a personal level; I have American family - if there is a revolution that would cause me to be worried and affected. OK. Good a reason as any. Gives me a little more reason to look out for my neighbors.

Do you really want me to go on? I think I see your points... more or less.

Save for the above, bank wise (take as far as need be), No, you don't really have to--sounds like it pains you somewhat.

I don't see a Revolution happening in this day and age, to be honest, especially in the US.

If revolution were as imminent as is claimed, surely we all (and I include people of all nationalities in this) would have seen something of this?

Sort of what I'm saying. There is more unrest, though. Probably insignificant on a relative scale. The greed is going up, though.

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-08-2009, 06:06 PM
You don't think people are boiling over? I keep hearing about another Revolution. I normally ignore people who say such things; however, you can't ignore the radio, tv, and internet these days. Something is boiling beneath the surface. You can feel it.Hype to sell papers and rhetoric from douchebags with anarchist Hot Topic t-shirts, no one cares, Law & Order is on!

jrrtoken
02-08-2009, 06:10 PM
You don't think people are boiling over?Don't you think you're being a bit over-dramatic and acutely paranoid?
I keep hearing about another Revolution.If it's from a man named Beelzebub, then I think you should see a priest. If it's from God, the I think you should see a psychiatrist.
I normally ignore people who say such things; however, you can't ignore the radio, tv, and internet these days.You can also ignore the bum on the street who says that Jesus is coming, which is most advisable.
Something is boiling beneath the surface. You can feel it.I'm feeling particularly dull at the moment, but that's probably because I'm reading this thread.

mur'phon
02-08-2009, 06:19 PM
Okay. I can see where you're coming from on an individual level...but on a larger level...I still have doubts. You mean to tell me other wealthy nations (namely those in europe) would be unable to stand on their own sufficiently if something happened to the US?

Yes, and to give you the basics in a simplified way, it works like this. Spesialization means things are produced where they are cheapest, drivven by demand from whoever is consuming. This means that for instance insane amounts of businesses depend on demand in other countries, and since the US is the biggest consumer....

I know the financial situations are volatile--but I have a hard time believing it would become financially so dire if things went to hell in USA. You really mean to tell me if the financial sector broke here, that places like yours would experience a crisis like a depression?

Finance is global, where the money commes from matters little, and since the US is such a big part of the financial sector in the world, the crisis is far from local.

As for whatever is boiling under the surface, it smells more like standard bad times uncertanty than a revolution.

Darth Avlectus
02-08-2009, 07:04 PM
Yes, and to give you the basics in a simplified way, it works like this. Spesialization means things are produced where they are cheapest, drivven by demand from whoever is consuming. This means that for instance insane amounts of businesses depend on demand in other countries, and since the US is the biggest consumer....

Unfortunately, I don't really see how consumption can continue as is. I mean, how much can we American people really consume? Sure we always need food and tools and clothes and similar.

So far as goods beyond the practical...those relying on us to buy those are in for one hell ride. Sorry. We're in a trend of buying practical stuff for gifts for the time being.

Also, though this may get flack from everyone here--if America doesn't start producing at least *some* of its own goods again (independently and privately as well as public and otherwise), and a natural disaster were to isolate us from the world so that imports and exports can't come and go, we are *screwed*. This isn't paranoia or propaganda talking here. Common sense: we can't stop seismic activity, or erupting volcanoes, or oceanic disasters or a host of other things. I'm not saying go isolationist, just a good idea to be prepared is all. And it's not a bad thing to have some localization in production.

Glad to see you understand some economics though. ;)

Finance is global, where the money commes from matters little, and since the US is such a big part of the financial sector in the world, the crisis is far from local. There is nobody else to consume your goods?
You provide for yourselves do you not?

As for whatever is boiling under the surface, it smells more like standard bad times uncertanty than a revolution.

That wasn't me that said that. Direct it to who did. I'm not all that sure about it actually happening or not. Nor am I completely sure of the backlash.

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-08-2009, 07:07 PM
you sir have convinced me that a revolution in the country that has the highest gdp of any single country would not matter to people in other countries all that much

Q
02-08-2009, 07:14 PM
As much as I might want it to happen, a revolution has about a snowball's chance in Hell of occuring here in the land of universal apathy. :dozey:

Things would have to get way, way worse than they are now.

Arcesious
02-08-2009, 07:55 PM
Indeed. To quote Kreia:

Apathy is death

Well maybe not death, but I agree, apathy isn't a very good thing for a representative democratic country trying to manage 300+ million people.

Things are going to give way, they're be talk of armageddon, revolution, etc, etc, things will get better every now and then, but it'll stay the same for a long, long time. I'll be centuries dead before Star trek becmes reality.

But I'm not being cynical here. I think that progress will be made, slowly, as the world's stability deteriorates. By the time we've got statrek level technology, we'll have to take some time to fix things up on our planet before we start traveling the galaxy.

But, even as bad as things are now, I do beleive that our Ancestors will travel the galaxy.

Web Rider
02-08-2009, 09:35 PM
I disagree with your premise Yar and most of the points you've made along the way, generally those things have existed in the US for years, and recessions have happened as well, and we've only had one revolution so far, and the conditions required for that to happen aren't existing now. I guess you could count the Civil War, but that's different reasons entirely, as the nation isn't that divided.

So no, no revolution, not now, not in the near future.

Q
02-08-2009, 09:54 PM
But, even as bad as things are now, I do beleive that our Ancestors will travel the galaxy.
I guess, if they somehow discovered time travel, maybe. :p

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-08-2009, 10:15 PM
Time isn't a fixed concept don't be so closed minded.

Web Rider
02-08-2009, 10:53 PM
Time isn't a fixed concept don't be so closed minded.

It's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly...timey wimey stuff.

EnderWiggin
02-08-2009, 11:00 PM
You and I don't have anything to say to each other on this topic. Another American Revolution doesn't directly affect you; thus, there is no longer any need for you and I to debate on the subject.

I will wait until an American Citizen chimes in.

Wow, well that's absurd. J7 is one of the smartest people I know and he knows more about American politics &etc than many Americans, perhaps including you.

Has the United States really become an empire? Do other people think this way? How can a Revolutionary War in the US be globally effective? I didn't think we had a global impact in such a scale.

Yes, we really do.

(By the way, PA is in America if you were wondering.)

_EW_

The Doctor
02-08-2009, 11:30 PM
It's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly...timey wimey stuff.

This reference is win.

That is all.

Jae Onasi
02-09-2009, 12:19 AM
Time isn't a fixed concept don't be so closed minded.
Anything is possible!!

mur'phon
02-09-2009, 02:43 AM
Unfortunately, I don't really see how consumption can continue as is. I mean, how much can we American people really consume? Sure we always need food and tools and clothes and similar.

Why can't it? Yes, it won't for a while, but the major reason for people not spending is A: their homes have lost much of their value, and B credit becomming very expensive (conected, but I asume you know how), sure, job loss/fear of loosing ones job factors inn, but with Americas flexible economy, it shouldn't have any problems picking up again once credit is available.

Also, though this may get flack from everyone here--if America doesn't start producing at least *some* of its own goods again (independently and privately as well as public and otherwise), and a natural disaster were to isolate us from the world so that imports and exports can't come and go, we are *screwed*. This isn't paranoia or propaganda talking here. Common sense: we can't stop seismic activity, or erupting volcanoes, or oceanic disasters or a host of other things. I'm not saying go isolationist, just a good idea to be prepared is all. And it's not a bad thing to have some localization in production.

I would like you to take a look at what the US actually produce, it should give you a nice surprise. Also, out of curiosity, could you mention one kind of disaster that would cut you off from the rest of the world?

There is nobody else to consume your goods?
You provide for yourselves do you not?

I presume this was directed at my earlier point and not the one I quoted? If so, let's asume 80% of what a company produce is sold to the US, what do you think will happen if demand there sinks to 20% of production? It is not as if demand will magically apear somewhere else.

@Jae:aparently including you wasting mucho time imitating banned members:P I know, 98 seconds of my life that I can never reclaim. :D --Jae

Web Rider
02-09-2009, 03:36 AM
I would like you to take a look at what the US actually produce, it should give you a nice surprise. Also, out of curiosity, could you mention one kind of disaster that would cut you off from the rest of the world?
Not to mention a great deal of the world would be really sad over not having any more bread, or corn. Honestly, if the US was totally economically isolated, but could still operate normally within it's bounds, we'd just re-purpose a lot of the land we use for farming profitable things like wheat and corn and grow stuff we need here.

Sure, we wouldn't have our Xboxes or our fancy Japanese cars, but I'm sure we could go without buying a new car for 5 years while companies here figure out how to build within the limits of the nation.

And if the US did ever magically reconnect with the world, you think it's a super-power now? Imagine a nation as powerful as the US that didn't require a single nation outside it's borders to survive. Any large nation that can develop power and sustain itsself without outside assistance is a nation to reckon with. Which is something that would make me obscenely happy, some of our dependencies on other nations are just stupid.

This reference is win.

That is all.
Heh, I saw that and went "Oh snap, The Doctor will get this!" and posted it.

Q
02-09-2009, 10:37 AM
Anything is possible!!
Bwahahahaha! String is the thing!

:rofl:

Yar-El
02-09-2009, 05:36 PM
*Walks into the thread and reads. Scratches head.*
I don't get Jae's joke? Can someone explain it?

mur'phon
02-09-2009, 06:04 PM
Search for posts by Windu-Chi, or if you're too lazy lets just say that he was litterally a colourfull ranter.

Jae Onasi
02-09-2009, 06:43 PM
You don't think people are boiling over? I keep hearing about another Revolution. I normally ignore people who say such things; however, you can't ignore the radio, tv, and internet these days. Something is boiling beneath the surface. You can feel it.
What are they boiling over about? I see no major protests like in the '60's. I see no rallies for some social cause. What, precisely, would Americans be revolting against, assuming you could get them up off their sofas and away from the latest episode of the The Simpsons?

jrrtoken
02-09-2009, 07:00 PM
What are they boiling over about? I see no major protests like in the '60's. I see no rallies for some social cause. What, precisely, would Americans be revolting against, assuming you could get them up off their sofas and away from the latest episode of the The Simpsons?Completely concur, as there is no way that any revolution in America shall ever get off the ground. The sad truth is, a good deal of Americans are either too lazy or too ignorant to be politically and socially conscious. If things became more economically desperate, then perhaps there will be more and more dissent, but since there were few real revolutionary movements during the Great Depression, which was essentially rock bottom, I doubt that there will be a real amount of rebellion at the moment.

Oh, and watches The Simpsons anymore? That show got sucky several years ago. :p

Yar-El
02-10-2009, 10:05 AM
...and this will not get you mad?

Article - Obama says only government can save U.S. economy (http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSWAT01094620090210)
WASHINGTON, Feb 9 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Monday made a new plea for Congress to pass his economic stimulus plan, saying the federal government was "the only entity left with the resources to jolt the U.S. economy back to life."

"It is only government that can break the vicious cycle where lost jobs lead to people spending less money which leads to even more layoffs. And breaking that cycle is exactly what the plan that's moving through Congress is designed to do," Obama said in his first news conference since taking office on Jan. 20.

Obama spoke hours after the Senate cleared a procedural hurdle on the Democratic-backed stimulus package, setting up a vote on Tuesday on the $838 billion package of tax cuts and emergency government spending which was likely to pass.

Last night I was going to jump online to see if anyone commented on the statement. I'm a little surprised. Welcome to socialism!

Jae Onasi
02-10-2009, 10:29 AM
I don't think this is going to foment revolution, however. People are less likely to revolt against the person/entity that's giving them something.

Astor
02-10-2009, 10:35 AM
Why are people in the US so afraid of Socialism? A lot of things Americans take for granted is already Socialist in nature, so why does it induce people to scream 'The End is Nigh'?

Pho3nix
02-10-2009, 10:57 AM
Why are people in the US so afraid of Socialism? A lot of things Americans take for granted is already Socialist in nature, so why does it induce people to scream 'The End is Nigh'?
My guess is it's a cultural thing, American 'socialism' is extremely mild so I don't get what all the fuss is about.

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-10-2009, 11:18 AM
Why are people in the US so afraid of Socialism? A lot of things Americans take for granted is already Socialist in nature, so why does it induce people to scream 'The End is Nigh'?because almost no one knows what it is. someone in my english class blamed the ussr's poor economy and human rights violations on them being socialist/communist (which were the same in nearly everyone else's eyes). i almost brought up tsarist russia and modern russia and how they're just as bad as soviet russia and how i'm a socialist, but i elected to hold my tongue and stay off government watchlists and remain the quiet kid in class rather than the commie subversive.

in short, the red scare never really went away, our politicians can trump anything they don't like by saying it's socialist/communist/marxist in addition to saying terrorists are quite fond of it because no one cares if it is or not and that we almost had an essentially openly socialist president in 1945 instead of truman. **** mccarthy, **** nixon they ushered in an era of cynicism, love of ignorance, and government secrecy and generally horrible **** thanks guys.


in shorter, people believe socialism is obama doing this instead of them not being ****ed by the health insurance industry and all that jazz

http://lucasforums.com/picture.php?albumid=16&pictureid=2300

mimartin
02-10-2009, 11:40 AM
Why would this upset me? At least Obama is intelligent enough to know that the Federal Government is the only entity that may have the ability to positively affect the economy. Although I personally have my doubts if this will work, but I guess if you have lost your job or if you are under threat of losing your job, then at least this looks like the Government is attempting to help you.

For those that do not believe that U.S. policies does not affect people beyond U.S. citizens may I suggest looking at U.S. trade agreements and U.S. treaties with other countries.

jrrtoken
02-10-2009, 12:33 PM
Why are people in the US so afraid of Socialism? A lot of things Americans take for granted is already Socialist in nature, so why does it induce people to scream 'The End is Nigh'?It isn't a very new thing; socialism has been seen as taboo for over a century now. Hence why Upton Sinclair gained little popularity in the US during his time, but was more renowned in Europe. Either way, the Cold War perpetuated the ignorance, and that ignorance is returning with Obama's so-called "radical" reforms, when essentially, FDR enacted similar legislature during the Depression.

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-10-2009, 12:41 PM
It isn't a very new thing; socialism has been seen as taboo for over a century now. Hence why Upton Sinclair gained little popularity in the US during his time, but was more renowned in Europe. Either way, the Cold War perpetuated the ignorance, and that ignorance is returning with Obama's so-called "radical" reforms, when essentially, FDR enacted similar legislature during the Depression.At least pre-Cold War it was taboo in government circles because robber barons used their sway to stave off progressive policies so they could build extravagant mansions and eat the poor or whatever, now it's ignorance and irrational fear.

Adavardes
02-10-2009, 12:49 PM
I'm gonna be perfectly frank here, this whole thread is a farce. There won't be a revolution, Obama's not going to do anything that horrible or destructive to our civil rights or our governmental integrity, which is what it would realistically take for a majority of citizens to rise up and overthrow the government. Our civil rights have not been challenged; in fact, it would seem like they're looking to be expanded upon, or at least brought back to normal levels after Bush's considerable constriction of them. I'm sorry, and I know people don't like pinning things to party members, and to be honest, it's not my favourite thing to do either. But this is nothing more than some conservatives having trouble accepting that they're no longer top dogs, throwing hissies and claiming Obama's going to be the end of us all.

As for socialism, I can tell you from personal experience that 9 times out of 10, when you encounter a person that is either terrified or averse to the concept of a more socialist America, they tie most of their fears or doubts to a misguided and ultimately incorrect ideology that socialism is basically the same thing as communism. This is usually due to the fact that they buy immediately into the rhetoric spewed by past officials on the matter, and never bother to do proper study on the subject. It's rooted in ignorance and alarmist slogans, most of which hold a conservative slant, and many of which have been the source for a lot of overly-emotional civilian responses to political actions, or even national disasters. 9/11 is case in point.

Obama won this election. By a landslide. The majority of American citizens wanted him as president, and thus far, he has done what many of his voters expected him to do: what he said he would do during the election. For a revolution to take place, he's gonna have to tick off a lot more people than just hard-line conservatives, who are the only ones really upset over this.

Yar-El
02-10-2009, 12:53 PM
Government controlled anything is pretty much a horrible thing. I do have to agree with one thing Obama mentioned. We have to hold people accountable for the money we give them; nevertheless, I'm not sure if giving money to failing companies is being responsible. I've been watching the stock market. Its on a freefall after the Treasury spoke up about their revised plan.

Socialism is not the way to go. We should allow these companies to fall; thus, allowing us to rebuild the industrial and agricultural sector. Obama's plan will not work in the long run.

jrrtoken
02-10-2009, 01:06 PM
Government controlled anything is pretty much a horrible thing.So you're an anarchist?
I do have to agree with one thing Obama mentioned. We have to hold people accountable for the money we give them; nevertheless, I'm not sure if giving money to failing companies is being responsible. I've been watching the stock market. Its on a freefall after the Treasury spoke up about their revised plan.It's been doing that forever, no need to panic
Socialism is not the way to go.So, I guess we should just let the megacorporation make up all of out policies, by giving workers no civil rights whatsoever, allowing employers to make their workers labor 18 hour days. Extreme capitalism allows for a free-for-all in the economy, allowing the rich to essentially control the population, with little oppostion form the government. Let's send little Johnny to the textile mills to get a penny an hour! Oh joy, isn't capitalism great!!!
We should allow these companies to fall;Yet if that happens, the stock market will most likely crash, triggering a global depression, meaning absolute unemployment. Sort of like what Hoover allowed.
thus, allowing us to rebuild the industrial and agricultural sector.Agriculture is controlled by the megacorps; there is no such thing these days as the family farmer. Honestly, I think there needs to be a government-sponsored civil engineering project, much like Boulder Dam, that will create thousands of jobs, in addition to providing utilities. For example, solar and wind farms, or highway renovations.
Obama's plan will not work in the long runThey said the same thing about the New Deal, but that worked pretty damn well.

mimartin
02-10-2009, 01:11 PM
Government controlled anything is pretty much a horrible thing.
So you are for privatizing the military too? Guess then it would make the possibility of revolution a reality.

Yar-El
02-10-2009, 01:13 PM
So you are for privatizing the military too? Guess then it would make the possibility of revolution a reality.
Some of the military is already privatized. You can blame the Republicans and Democrats for that one.

jrrtoken
02-10-2009, 01:16 PM
Some of the military is already privatized.Which is exactly the problem. PMCs such as Blackwater have little government control and oversight, allowing for anything to happen.

Adavardes
02-10-2009, 01:16 PM
So, I guess we should just let the megacorporation make up all of out policies, by giving workers no civil rights whatsoever, allowing employers to make their workers labor 18 hour days. Extreme capitalism allows for a free-for-all in the economy, allowing the rich to essentially control the population, with little oppostion form the government. Let's send little Johnny to the textile mills to get a penny an hour! Oh joy, isn't capitalism great!!!

Agreed, on all accounts. Capitalism is, undoubtedly, the worst economic philosophy in the long run. Does it produce results? Yes. Are the by-products and costs of it, the corporate control, the bribery, the corruption, worth it? No.

I don't trust the government. You'd be a fool to say that you do, unconditionally. But of the two evils, between the government and the corporationism, it is very, VERY much the lesser. At least with government control, we, the people, have a direct influence in what happens. With corporations, we don't. It's all about what can be done to make more money, whatever the cost.

Yar-El
02-10-2009, 01:20 PM
Which is exactly the problem. PMCs such as Blackwater have little government control and oversight, allowing for anything to happen.
Why are you not mad? Why will there be no revolt?

Agreed, on all accounts. Capitalism is, undoubtedly, the worst economic philosophy in the long run. Does it produce results? Yes. Are the by-products and costs of it, the corporate control, the bribery, the corruption, worth it? No.
Corruption comes from both sides. Your surounded by a corrupted government. Democrats and Republicans are both extremely corrupt.

Adavardes
02-10-2009, 01:21 PM
Corruption comes from both sides.

Corruption based on bribery comes directly from greed, which is allowed to run rampant by capitalism, as greed is the primary fuel for the economic policy. This has nothing to do with partisanism. Nice try though.

Yar-El
02-10-2009, 01:22 PM
Corruption based on bribery comes directly from greed, which is allowed to run rampant by capitalism, as greed is the primary fuel for the economic policy.
We have a problem don't we? Capitalism and Socialism breeds corruption. What do we do about a government that is embodied in corruption?

Adavardes
02-10-2009, 01:24 PM
We have a problem don't we? Capitalism and Socialism breeds corruption. What do we do about a government that is embodied in corruption?

... How does Socialism breed corruption?

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-10-2009, 01:25 PM
Government controlled anything is pretty much a horrible thing.Agreed, on all accounts. Capitalism is, undoubtedly, the worst economic philosophy in the long run. Does it produce results? Yes. Are the by-products and costs of it, the corporate control, the bribery, the corruption, worth it? No.To respond to the both of you, governments are what the people make them or let them become, corruption, bribery, and corruption are inherent in any system that isn't effectively policed by the people. To respond more specifically to Adavardes, I feel both capitalism and socialism are detrimental in the long run depending on a country's goals, generally socialism provides a stable economy, whereas capitalism provides higher growth at the cost of risking massive losses, and ideally we should strike a balance between them.

Oh yeah, I just went Eastern on your ass.


e:

... How does Socialism breed corruption?All forms of government are susceptible to corruption in the sense that private/individual interests can be furthered at the expense of the greater good.

jrrtoken
02-10-2009, 01:25 PM
We have a problem don't we? Capitalism and Socialism breeds corruption. What do we do about a government that is embodied in corruption?You sack 'em and replace 'em with someone more trustworthy. Kinda like what happened when people elected Obama.

Oh, and I thought that capitalism is the answer to all of our problems. :confused:
and ideally we should strike a balance between them.Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. But it probably won't happen in America.

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-10-2009, 01:28 PM
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. But it probably won't happen in America.Don't be so negative, we already nationalized more than a few banks!

Yar-El
02-10-2009, 01:30 PM
You sack 'em and replace 'em with someone more trustworthy. Kinda like what happened when people elected Obama.

Oh, and I thought that capitalism is the answer to all of our problems. :confused:
Most historical leaders are forged through experiences. George Washington wanted to retire; however, the founding fathers needed someone as a symbol. His actions of courage, self-sacrifice, and honor caused the people to thrust leadership upon him. Obama is not that man or woman.

Adavardes
02-10-2009, 01:31 PM
All forms of government are susceptible to corruption in the sense that private/individual interests can be furthered at the expense of the greater good.

Well, I supposed that dirty government officials would go for tax dollars and steal that way, instead of getting corporate cutbacks. Okay, so both sides can lead to corruption. I agree with you that ideally, in a perfect world, we'd have both. But I don't see that happening, so I'll go with the option that takes out the factor of corporate leeches that suck the life out of civilians and breed many social and political evils, such as conformism, wealth gaps, and overseas slave labour.

Also, Yar-El, stop repeating the same tired argument that Obama isn't experienced enough. That is SO 2008.

jrrtoken
02-10-2009, 01:32 PM
Most historical leaders are forged through experiences. George Washington wanted to retire; however, the founding fathers needed someone as a symbol. His actions of courage, self-sacrifice, and honor caused the people to thrust leadership upon him. Obama is not that man or woman.Thanks for being off-topic, with little actual factual evidence. That's cool. Obama's just another socialist, and they can't be trusted at all.

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-10-2009, 01:34 PM
Most historical leaders are forged through experiences. George Washington wanted to retire; however, the founding fathers needed someone as a symbol. His actions of courage, self-sacrifice, and honor caused the people to thrust leadership upon him. Obama is not that man or woman.I most definitely agree that Obama is not that woman, however you have no way of know that he isn't that man, and in the interests of logic and fairness you should at least give him a chance to prove himself.

Yar-El
02-10-2009, 02:04 PM
Thanks for being off-topic, with little actual factual evidence. That's cool. Obama's just another socialist, and they can't be trusted at all.
Now I know you don't know your American history. How George Washington became our first president is nothing to shy from. John F. Kennedy was also a similar case. Both men had experience with war and being a leader. This does relate to the subject. Figure it out.

mur'phon
02-10-2009, 02:25 PM
Advardes
Agreed, on all accounts. Capitalism is, undoubtedly, the worst economic philosophy in the long run. Does it produce results? Yes.
Are the by-products and costs of it, the corporate control, the bribery, the corruption, worth it? No.

Look at the world, which parts of it have been doing good? Capitalism (or, the practicall examples of it anyway) is a wonderfull way of increasing the wealth of all citzens in a society. Of course, it dosen't do it fairly, so the income gap betwen rich and poor end up high. So, how is a system that creates oodles of wealth "undoubtedly the worst economic philosophy in the long run"?

But I don't see that happening, so I'll go with the option that takes out the factor of corporate leeches that suck the life out of civilians and breed many social and political evils, such as conformism, wealth gaps, and overseas slave labour.

Lets instead enjoy having government leeches, and the evils they bring, like lack of inovation, slow growth, lower quality products etc

Yar-El
Government controlled anything is pretty much a horrible thing. I do have to agree with one thing Obama mentioned. We have to hold people accountable for the money we give them; nevertheless, I'm not sure if giving money to failing companies is being responsible. I've been watching the stock market. Its on a freefall after the Treasury spoke up about their revised plan.

If you are talking about giving cash too carmakers and their ilk, agreed, they can fall without causing much long term damage. The financial sector on the other hand fuels the rest of the economy, and alowing big parts of it to fall would mean alowing a lot of profittable companies to fall with them.

Socialism is not the way to go. We should allow these companies to fall; thus, allowing us to rebuild the industrial and agricultural sector.

Err, why would you want to rebuild your industry? It seems to be working alright to me, focusing on what it's best at. As for Agriculture, I hope your idea of alowing companies to fall aplies here too, because a lot will fall if you cut their subsidies, which IMO would be good in the long run.


@jmac: Tsarist Russia, yes, modern Russia, no. As much as I hate our current administration, they aren't that bad, yet

jrrtoken
02-10-2009, 02:33 PM
Now I know you don't know your American history. How George Washington became our first president is nothing to shy from. John F. Kennedy was also a similar case. Both men had experience with war and being a leader. This does relate to the subject. Figure it out.So? Military honor or leadership is not required for a president to be considered great. Either way, this is totally irrelevant to the topic.

Yar-El
02-10-2009, 02:47 PM
So? Military honor or leadership is not required for a president to be considered great. Either way, this is totally irrelevant to the topic. Whow!! Slowdown there. That is not what I said. You really don't know American history. George Washington and Kennedy both had military honor and leadership. How they got it was not through elections.