(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.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

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.

Eternity · 26-30, M

@BlueVeins the 2 party system shoots that right in the foot. With the division they sow between us such a consensus is nigh impossible.

I say we either need to hijack a state via its own governmental system and let the rest of the nation bicker itself back to the stone age or cut the head off the snake and strike the federal government directly in a surprise attack hidden within a multinational corporation with a dubious mission statement and shadow investors from nations that have a bone to pick.

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.