Poll Shows 29% of Americans Believe Armed Revolution May Become Necessary

Tags: Armed, Revolution

Views: 655

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Thanks for the link to the article - I will read it.

Pathetic.  

Lately I've been learning about the later history of the Roman empire.  Not the part that we always think of with capital in Rome, but the part that lasted 1,000 years after division between Rome and Constantinople, and the continued empire after the Italian part fell to invaders.  That Roman empire was the wall between Islamic take-over of Europe, and gave the West a chance to develop socially and technologically, and maintain an nonMuslim identity.

The key lesson for me is every empire ends.  Every civilization ends.  Some are faster than others.  Most people in most empires probably think of themselves as special and eternal.  Most such people are long forgotten in the dust.  The culture of the current American Empire began - what - 500 years ago?  Long before the US was formed, although we can date the political and social history with the American Revolution.  So it's been a long run.

The other key lesson to me is Empires usually fall due to internal corruption, decadence, and stupidity.  They implode, and others come in and clean up the mess, usually via slaughter, enslavement, and coopting the remaining citizens.  Leaders, and the citizenry, forget what brought them together, why they prospered, and why they became powerful.  Infighting, waste, resource depletion, political intrigue, chaos, and random disasters pull apart the common fabric of society, leading to downfall.

Armed revolution over what?  What rights are at risk?  Armed revolution would help people how?

I think those people who want "revolution" are narcissistic dimwits.

My years of teaching on the reservations around Spokane taught me much about collapse of cultures and the terrible prices paid by survivors. When I held classes, I always invited in several elders to tell their memories of their childhoods and upbringings. Many of them remembered the times of Teepees and migrating with food availability. They were stories of hard time, but also proud stories of community, lost by forced movement to reservations. They told of the adjustments they had to make and how they accomplished it. 

Those woman are all dead now, and the younger generation reclaim some of the ancestral teachings of their elders. There life will never be as the old times, and I don't think many of them want to return to those difficult times. What they seek and try to maintain is the bonding of family in support of becoming modern with ancient strengths. Many of them maintain a spirit sense and in many ways it centers them. They long ago gave up the notion that their shirts would protect them from bullets, even as some claim their sense of tribal belonging. Others reject tribal culture out of hand. 

I wonder if the sense of pride and self respect that some have can be achieved by our race and generation?

Quite a few rights are currently being threatened or have already been overruled with unconstitutional legislation.

 

The 2012 & 2013 National Defense Authorization Act grants the executive branch the authority to detain citizens on ground of being "belligerent" - a term which the executive branch expressly refused to define in the face of Congressional inquiry. If they decide you are beligerent, you can be detained without probable cause, without charges, denied access to an attorney, denied a trial, and held indefinietly for "as long as the war on terror continues." In a recent Senate hearing, a spokesperson for the Pentagon - assistant secretary of defense Michael Sheehan - stated that the war on terror may last indefinitely, and probably at least 10 to 20 more years (1). In 2012, Obama released a signing statement saying that the indefinite detention clause would not be used on american citizens, but the statement was a worthless placation because the first action taken for "belligerent" persons is to strip them of citizenship and treat them as hostile enemy combatants, so if the indefinite detention authority is used on you, you are already not a citizen anymore. This is all in the bill and can easily be found at innumerable legal websites now.

 

The NDAA also overules Posse Commitatus - which forbids military jurisdiction on domestic soil - by categorizing the United States as "a battleground for the war on terror."

 

Another piece of legislation which takes away fundamental rights is the 2012 National Defense Resource Preparedness Executive Order (order 13603), which grants authority to the executive branch to seize any resources deemed necessary for the continuity of government (including forced human labor), "in peacetime or times of national emergency," without Congressional approval, and not subjectable to judicial review. The order is an extensive amendment to the 1950 Defense Production Act, which authorized the seizure of resources during wartime, after congressional approval. That order overrules the 4th amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure, and was used to legalize the forced removal, at gunpoint, of people from their homes after the Boston marathon bombing (they could also have used the "Constitution Free Zone" authority in a recent immigration reform bill, which suspends 4th amendment rights anywhere within 100 miles of US borders, and keep in mind that 2/3rds of the country's population lives within 100 miles of the border). 13603 also grants the executive branch the right to regulate the economy as a preparatory measure for potential emergencies. They can force people to develop certain products, force them to make those products available to the government, regulate prices, etc. And remember, they can do this all in peacetime, without congressional approval. In short...fascism. The very definition of fascism.

Moreover, Citizens United has made it virtually impossible to overturn unconstitutional legislation by categorizing money as "political free speech." Since 2008, when CU was signed, candidates who spend more money on their election campaign win their election 85-93% of the time (2). An overwhelming statistical correlation that makes it impossible to deny that money now buys political power, which in turn buys legislative results. And since more than 65% of this nation's wealth rests with less than 5% of its populace, there is literally no way for the majority to shout louder than the financially elite minority. They will always have a bigger voice now, no matter how many of us cry out against them. They have bought the government, making peaceful, legal recourse a dead end.

 

I could go on for a while like this, but those two pieces of legislation are two of the biggest threats to our constitutionally guaranteed liberties. I highly recommend reading executive order 13603 (3), if you have the time. It is only about 5 pages long, and is among the most disturbing pieces of legislation you'll ever read.

 

1. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/17/endless-war-on-...

2. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/oct/17/occu...

3. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-ord...

I highly recommend reading executive order 13603 (3), if you have the time. It is only about 5 pages long, and is among the most disturbing pieces of legislation you'll ever read.

Executive Orders are administrative acts of the President and one of the problems with them is that they are not legislation, not rules established by the Congress and representing public desires, but absolute fiat which is supposed to conform to limits set by legislation. The Presidency has grown in power with respect to national security and Congress has abdicated its authority for declaring war.

As everyone knows but often forgets, Congress began to surrender its war powers with the advent of nuclear weapons at the end of World War II. The idea was to give the executive branch authority for quick response. The United States came out of the war with enormous advantages both militarily and economically and was determined to preserve its double hegemony at all costs.

Keeping a national security threat prominent in the public consciousness serves two distinct but related conservative aims: it allows the government to engage in military actions as it pleases, claiming that as its primary responsibility and to contain or reduce its responsibilities for social programs as too expensive in a period of such great insecurity requiring great military expenditures.

Twenty nine percent Americans reveal that they are stupids!

Exactly Madhukar!  I personally believe the stupids are more than twenty-nine percent though!

Madhukar, it's more than 29%.

Armed revolution for what and against what? People are stupid but I understand the situation. I know those who said martial law would be declared in the USA before Obama was elected to a second term. They appeared to really believe this. Some have Internet blogs about it. I suppose that they can now point to Arizona to side track from the original claim, but that is a different story. Why do people believe that revolution is coming? Uncertainty. Technology coming faster than a speeding bullet. New world order. It's not 1950 anymore. Throw in the increasing possibility of "being nuked" and the gullible see "biblical prophesy" and the "end of the world." Well, in these uncertain times somebody would have to do something wouldn't they?

And now we find that in Kentucky a 5 year old boy has accidentally shot and killed his 2 year old sister with a rifle that his parents bought him the year before. Were the parents wanting to get this child ready for the "coming armed revolution?" What sort of moronic thinking is going on here? I say prosecute the parents!

The United States is actually in a permanent state of martial law right now, and has been since the signing of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, which declared the US "a battleground for the war on terror...for as long as the war on terror continues." It overruled Posse Commitatus, which forbade military jurisdiction on domestic soil. It also overruled Habeus Corpus and due process, as well as the 4th amendment.

 

Executive Order 13603 compounded the problem by granting the executive branch the right to forcibly seize resources, including forced human labor, during peacetime (it explicitly says this in the document, on whitehouse.goc), without congressional approval, and not subjectable to judicial review. Those two powers by Congress and the Judicial branch are essential to the system of checks and balances in our government, and they effectively constitute a cecession of the executive branch from the authorities of the other two branches.

 

The ONLY aspect of traditional examples of martial law not currently being utilized is the power of law enforcers to deputize the citizenry, which of course the executive branch would not desire to use when THEY are the ones waging war against the american people. It would only be useful against foreign invasion, when law enforcers are running in short order and the help of the citizenry is desired. But every other aspect of martial law is currently being implemented throughout the United States. The only reason it doesn't seem like it is because you haven't tried to rise up against your government yet. But, rest assured, if you do, you will see exactly how militant our current situation is.

 

A lot of people DO tend to get hyperbolic about the tyranny of the government, new world orders, and all of that, but in the case of martial law, they are correct. We are in martial law. But don't take my word for it. Read the NDAA and executive order 13603.

I think there is more at play here than sheer stupidity. Maybe this is an expression of despair. The US are still drowning in debts and ignoring education / healthcare to keep the war machine going. In a way it's understandable, as the US doesn't seem to have much choice. They are lashing out not because they want to, but because they have to. The war machine itself takes away a large amount of resources just for upkeep.

What would the US be without their war machine? Sure freedom requires protecting, but to the point of having to represent 50% of all military forces on the world?

I'm not a fan of armed conflict, not at all, but in the mind of the uneducated and ignorant this seems to be the only solution they can see.

We will have to wait and see what happens I guess...

US military spending could be cut by 85% and we would still have the most expensive military in the world.

And before calling people who favor armed conflict uneducated, you should have a gander at executive order 13603 and the 2012 NDAA. I tend to think the stuff about new world orders and forced population control are hyperbolic, but the rhetoric about martial law in the US and the trampling of constitutional liberties is very much on the mark. Especially from 13603. That piece of legislation does more to dismantle the constitution than anything else in our history. Not trying to be a jerk, but if you haven't read it, then you have no business calling other people ignorant.

It's only about 5 pages. Have a look, and then tell me if you think people are still up in arms over nothing. Pay close attention to the part where it says "during peacetime or times of national emergency." Also pay attention to what it says about the executive branch having the authority to regulate the economy, and what it says about the use of biological weapons. And keep in consideration while you read it that every single official being granted power in that order, including the authority to determine when and to what extent it is used, is a member of the executive branch. It denies both Congress and the Judicial branch their traditional powers of checks and balances.

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-ord...

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

Latest Activity

Bertold Brautigan replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Atheism and the Holocaust: Primo Levi and Os Guiness
5 minutes ago
Dr. Allan H. Clark replied to Thomas Pietrocarli's discussion What if God revealed himself to you?
29 minutes ago
Joseph P replied to dudaboli yev's discussion David Silverman Debate Mormons on Religion, Morality and Science. in the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
32 minutes ago
sk8eycat replied to Thomas Pietrocarli's discussion What if God revealed himself to you?
52 minutes ago
Dr. Allan H. Clark replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Atheism and the Holocaust: Primo Levi and Os Guiness
1 hour ago
Freethinker31 commented on Martin A. Moe, Jr's blog post Is Religion the Offspring of Evolution?
1 hour ago
Dr. Allan H. Clark replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Atheism and the Holocaust: Primo Levi and Os Guiness
1 hour ago
Dr. Allan H. Clark replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Atheism and the Holocaust: Primo Levi and Os Guiness
1 hour ago
Michael Penn replied to Thomas Pietrocarli's discussion What if God revealed himself to you?
1 hour ago
Future replied to Thomas Pietrocarli's discussion What if God revealed himself to you?
1 hour ago
dudaboli yev liked dudaboli yev's discussion David Silverman Debate Mormons on Religion, Morality and Science.
1 hour ago
dudaboli yev added a discussion to the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
1 hour ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service