Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

(US) The states's entire justification for having the amount of power that they do is they claim to exist for the best interest of the common people.

But their actions clearly indicate that they do not.

They're more interested in spending hundreds of billions of dollars on world domination than providing affordable Healthcare and quality education to the people who make their ludicrous wealth and power possible.

The state's only interest is holding onto and increasing the power that they have over the people of both this nation and the world, and facilitating the greed that enriches the few at the expense of the future of all mankind.

I wonder what exactly it would take, logistically speaking, to depose the state and to ensure such a system never takes hold of the nation again.

After all the coups our government has instigated I wonder if a foreign power would be interested in funding/equipping one here, and if such an endeavor could ever meet with success.
BlueVeins · 22-25
It's funny how... at least in theory, the US gov't would be relatively easy to depose. All you'd really need is for some 3/5 of the public (very roughly speaking) to get sufficiently fed up that they would just elect a congress & presidency who'll just re-write the Constitution & start all over again. It would require a minimal level of organization and not even all that much determination. Basically the only weapon they have to weild against us is mind games, but they use it so expertly that winning is virtually impossible for us.
BlueVeins · 22-25
@Eternity Taking over a state wouldn't work because

A) anything actually subversive we do could be overruled by the federal government
B) we'd still struggle with the same problems that partisan state governments struggle with such as the risk of capital flight & economic push and pull from the rest of the country.
C) all of the nation's media enterprise and capital would be dedicated to breaking down that neutral state. Even if it's possible to resist this effort, we'd always be on the backfoot and thus couldn't really use that position to make any forward progress.

As for the surprise attack thing, the US federal government is large enough that any act intended to stun it would almost certainly have to be a series of sudden attacks, sorta like 9/11. But 9/11 taught us that Americans -- furious as we may be with each other -- treat acts of violence against the state as violence against America as a people. The resulting bloodshed would be beyond measure, with the vast majority of the populace opposing the insurrection.

As far as I'm concerned, our best bet is just to take over the DNC through the flawed structures that it's created and then attempt to change the Constitution. The likelihood of success is low, but it's the best we got imo.
Eternity · 26-30, M
@BlueVeins the 9/11 attacks were against civilians mostly. That's why they were so not well received.

Also they were carried out by foreigners.

Attacks against strictly federal government targets by American citizens and for the clearly expressed purpose of freeing the people from an indifferent and power hungry government would hit the people quite differently I'm sure.
BlueVeins · 22-25
@Eternity One of the planes was headed towards the White House, one hit the Pentagon, and the other two hit the World Trade Center, which was a government asset in itself (granted, only a state government asset). You're basically gonna have to kill a llllllot of civilians if you want to take out the government bc the government is predominantly made up of civilians. Maybe the best route would be to blow up the Capitol Building, White House, Pentagon, DNC, & RNC at the same time. But even that would still follow the profile of a terrorist attack, and thousands of civilians would still be murdered.

It's unlikely that the message of liberation would be taken to heart without a serious explanation of the nature of the freedom you want to provide, and I struggle to see what explanation could be compelling enough to make even a decent fraction of the people view this kind of mass-murder as a mere necessary evil. The examples you've cited of healthcare and education would be too controversial, [i]even if[/i] the public takes your word for it (which they won't). And since the ruling government controls the media -- and will almost certainly end your life within a week -- they're gonna have almost full control of the framing of this issue.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
GerOttman · 61-69, M
When exactly did anyone claim the government exists for the good of the common people?? Are you in the US??
Eternity · 26-30, M
@GerOttman read the preamble of the constitution
GerOttman · 61-69, M
@Eternity I've read the whole thing...
Eternity · 26-30, M
@GerOttman well there you go. The preamble is literally all about how the state exists to "promote the general welfare" and "secure the blessings of liberty" and "to form a more perfect union".

It is supposed to exist to improve the quality of life of the people who make it up but they don't.

We'd be better off doing our own thing at this point. We aren't stupid; we're the ones that create the infrastructure and the order. The state just collects our taxes and makes arbitrary rules and spends our money how they see fit
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Eternity · 26-30, M
@MarineBob I am perfectly financially stable and well educated buddy. And probably in better shape than you as i work out regularly. That doesn't mean that the shit that goes down here is right.

Only a fool can look at this country and say that we are living up to our constitutional aims as a nation of "free people" lead by "the people" and for "the people".

How are them VA benefits holding up? Satisfying service in exchange for yours?
MarineBob · 56-60, M
@Eternity VA is great since COVID they prefer I see my own physician, even had knee replacement at the local hospital
Eternity · 26-30, M
@MarineBob well good. I'm glad.

 
Post Comment