[JohnnyTheA]

Originally Posted by chucker That depends. It's a bit early to tell what those protests accomplished. For instance, Egypt is now under military rule. Apparently, an election is planned for November.

That's true. And for some people ( like Coptic Christians), things are getting a LOT worse. We will see. But those protests cannot be compared to what is happening in the us. Different ballgame.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by JohnnyTheA That's true. And for some people ( like Coptic Christians), things are getting a LOT worse. We will see. But those protests cannot be compared to what is happening in the us. Different ballgame.

Totally agreed.

Originally Posted by !Marc! Maybe it will take a few attemps. At least the Egyptians know that if they are getting fucked over by their military, they can rise up and throw the fuckers out.

Yes; good luck with that. Fighting against a political establishment while being backed against the military is one thing. Fighting against the military who also have become the political establishment, though?

Originally Posted by !Marc! We seem to be totally passive into accepting the worst crap on the table, and then telling ourselves were doing great!

Maybe so, but the US aren't really that badly off.

[!Marc!]

So the answer is just to roll over and take whatever the ruling elite dictate?
Might have well not bothered to overthrow Mubarak.
Was Gadaffi really that bad?
What about Assad?

I'd rather be under a dictatorship. The people there know what they're getting. It at least honest in that regard.
Our system has fooled every single on of us into believing there is a choice to be decided when we go to the ballot box.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by !Marc! So the answer is just to roll over and take whatever the ruling elite dictate?

No. I don't know where you read that into any of my posts, because I never wrote it.

However, I'm not sure if these protests are very good at effecting change.

It seems to me that part of the problem is a confusion over how far freedom ought to go. Should banks be free to trade at whichever rapid and high rate they wish, regardless of consequence, and devoid of oversight? Should corporations be free to contribute whichever amounts of money to politicians? And to advertise, shaping public opinion? Those are freedoms, too. And yet, restricting them could ultimately lead to more freedom for the individual.

Originally Posted by !Marc! Might have well not bothered to overthrow Mubarak. Was Gadaffi really that bad? What about Assad?

I don't know. I wasn't there.

Originally Posted by !Marc! I'd rather be under a dictatorship. The people there know what they're getting. It at least honest in that regard. Our system has fooled every single on of us into believing there is a choice to be decided when we go to the ballot box.

There's a lot you can do. Write to a congressman. Join an advocacy group. Become a freelance journalist.

A representative democracy doesn't give its individuals a lot of power, but it does give some leverage.

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by chucker However, I'm not sure if these protests are very good at effecting change.

No they are completely useless, that is why they are tolerated.

Would Gadaffi have fallen if those people went and sat down peacefully in the centre of Tripoli?

There's a lot you can do. Write to a congressman. Join an advocacy group. Become a freelance journalist. A representative democracy doesn't give its individuals a lot of power, but it does give some leverage.

Which is all tolerated and encouraged because its completely useless - while empowering the plebs into thinking theyre making a difference, while you rape and pillage thier lives for your record profit.

When the system and it cronies is fucked beyond recognition, do you really think that tip-toeing within the boundaries of that system is the answer to overthrowing the system?

[drewprops]

So Marc, what is your specific vision for 1st World Revolution?


...

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by drewprops So Marc, what is your specific vision for 1st World Revolution? ...

Something along the lines of

• Scandinavian model of equality, peace, education and prosperity for everyone.
• Highly regulated public positive money banking system, with a return to positive capitalism and positive investment.
• A 'Chinese' style democracy where the leaders are smart, educated people solely tasked with running a successful country, rather than running a successful re-election campaign.
• Abolition of lobby groups and other parasitic interest groups.
• Sustainable energy infrastructure program and phased out abolition of fossil fuels for primary energy.
• Socialized health care not provided by private companies and safety net.
• Complete rewrite of foreign policy, to unite and propser the world, rather than divide, conqueour and steal resources.
• Corperation profit limit, with excesses taxed for use in positive infrastructure, education and research developments

For a start.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by !Marc! A 'Chinese' style democracy

I'm missing something, right?

Originally Posted by !Marc! Abolition of lobby groups and other parasitic interest groups.

Without lobbyists, who's going to advise politicians?

Originally Posted by !Marc! Corperation profit limit, with excesses taxed for use in positive infrastructure, education and research developments

Who decides what that limit is?

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by chucker I'm missing something, right?

It would appear so.

Without lobbyists, who's going to advise politicians?

Lobbyists dont advise politicians. They bribe, corrupt, or plain threaten them. We dont need that shit.

Who decides what that limit is?

Does it matter what the limit is, if everyone is adhering to the same ceiling?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by !Marc! Lobbyists dont advise politicians. They bribe, corrupt, or plain threaten them. We dont need that shit.

That doesn't answer my question.

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by chucker That doesn't answer my question.

To answer your question, people that advise government will be independant non-profit appointed advisors tasked with serving the best interests of the national,public and environmental good.

As opposed to lobbyists looking to make a fast buck for some shadowy umbrella corperation, at the expense of the national, public and environmental good.

Hope that clears it up.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by !Marc! To answer your question, people that advise government will be independant non-profit appointed advisors tasked with serving the best interests of the national,public and environmental good.

Those are still lobbyists.

Also, good luck defining "national, public and environmental good" and reaching a consensus on what that entails.

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by chucker Those are still lobbyists. Also, good luck defining "national, public and environmental good" and reaching a consensus on what that entails.

Well, as the richest nation in the entire planet, the chinese have done a mighty good job of making decisions for their own good for the long term and not for any particular individuals reelection.

As the most indebted nations on the Earth (without a hope in hell of paying any of it back) - that were not so long ago the richest, our system and politicians have done a mighty fine job of fucking it all up for the vast majority of its population.

But nevermind, becuase it did produce a few mega wealthy individuals - who coincidently then moved East when they were done pillaging.

Look after yourself Chucker, I see you are too ingrained in the failing old system to envisage any kind of deviation from the status-quo.

Good luck with your country's bailing out of Greece, Portugal, Spain, Ireland and Italy, and the ensuing recession that is coming because you have to recapitilize the German and French banks - but hey! nevermind - because when your failed politicians tell you thats what you must do, (as in its a massive undemocratic transfer of wealth from the public to the central banks via powerless and corrupt politicians)

... just you keep bending over.

BTW, I am massively pro-European integration, and I am not unaware that most of the Euro crisis was entirely manufactured by the intentional actions of the American credit ratings agencies working to destroy European integration because it is a threat to American Fascist Interests and Power in having a reserve currency.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by !Marc! Well, as the richest nation in the entire planet, the chinese have done a mighty good job of making decisions for their own good for the long term and not for any particular individuals reelection.

Rrrrrright.

Ever walk down the street in China and voice your opinion?

Didn't think so.

Originally Posted by !Marc! Look after yourself Chucker, I see you are too ingrained in the failing old system to envisage any kind of deviation from the status-quo. Good luck with your country's bailing out of Greece, Portugal, Spain, Ireland and Italy, and the ensuing recession that is coming because you have to recapitilize the German and French banks - but hey! nevermind - because when your failed politicians tell you thats what you must do, (as in its a massive transfer of wealth from the public to the central banks)

What is your point? Is everything seriously that black and white for you?

Originally Posted by !Marc! just you keep bending over.

I don't appreciate that language.

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by chucker Rrrrrright. Ever walk down the street in China and voice your opinion? Didn't think so.

Re China:
Because of human pyschology and logistical reality, radical change never happens overnight. We should be glad that China is doing it relatively slowly, because if they spent all their money and developed into a new 'Europe' in a decade, the price of food and commodities would kill the rest of us off,

People have to be prepared, ready and embracing of change for it to happen. Yes there are an awful lot of things that we perceive as wrong with China, but it is a developing country, not unlike Europe and America were after the industrial revolution.

Things in our countries were not so good then either for the average person. No human rights, labour laws, no healthcare, working 14 hour days, 7 days a week for a pittance. Thats how nations evolve. We've been there and done it. China is going through it right now. Yes it sucks for their working classes.

They will have their own mini-revolutions and labour standoffs just like we did while we were growing. After a while, there will be a better balance between people and corperations, and the wealth and liberty will spread out across the country. Just like it did here.

What is your point? Is everything seriously that black and white for you?

I think my point is, is how screwed over do you have to be before you would be prepared to fight for your survival? Perhaps you wont.

I don't appreciate that language.

Its a bit pretentious to get upset over a little analogous expression, dont you think?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by !Marc! People have to be prepared, ready and embracing of change for it to happen. Yes there are an awful lot of things that we perceive as wrong with China, but it is a developing country, not unlike Europe and America were after the industrial revolution. Things in our countries were not so good then either for the average person. No human rights, labour laws, no healthcare, working 14 hour days, 7 days a week for a pittance. Thats how nations evolve. We've been there and done it. China is going through it right now. Yes it sucks for their working classes.

And yet you bring them up as if they were utopia.

Originally Posted by !Marc! They will have their own mini-revolutions and labour standoffs just like we did while we were growing. After a while, there will be a better balance between people and corperations, and the wealth and liberty will spread out across the country. Just like it did here.

Yes, and how did that work out here? Oh right, that's exactly what this thread is about in the first place.

Originally Posted by !Marc! I think my point is, is how screwed over do you have to be before you would be prepared to fight for your survival? Perhaps you wont.

I'm doing okay so far. Maybe that'll change; maybe it won't. I'm more worried about people who aren't so fortunate, some of whom are forum regulars.

Do you really think the answer for them is "go to China; sure, you'll have the labor standards of three centuries back, and virtually no civil rights, but at least… uh, nope, there's no silver lining"?

Originally Posted by !Marc! Its a bit pretentious to get upset over a little analogous expression, dont you think?

Maybe.

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by chucker And yet you bring them up as if they were utopia.

eh?

Yes, and how did that work out here? Oh right, that's exactly what this thread is about in the first place.

Are you suggesting that we should have never embarked on progress because it could go wrong?
You seem resigned and scared. Are you old? I'd bet you're conservative.

I think it would be better to ask why did it go wrong here and who is responsible. Then put it right.
Putting it right does not mean an exponential increase of more of the same that got us in the shit in the first place, and if putting it right means a systematic demolishing of the power and system that screwed us all over, im going to fight for that.

I'm doing okay so far. Maybe that'll change; maybe it won't. I'm more worried about people who aren't so fortunate, some of whom are forum regulars. Do you really think the answer for them is "go to China; sure, you'll have the labor standards of three centuries back, and virtually no civil rights, but at least… uh, nope, there's no silver lining"? Maybe.

Where did I claim going to China is a solution? I think you're playing games - this whole last post of yours seemed confused and/or intentionally misleading.

I gave a solution in a big list above.
You are free to critique, but I see from you only frightened resignation.

Perhaps you should put your list of solutions on the table. Then we can see perhaps the extent of your reasoning skills.

[drewprops]

Okay I'm glad that Marc was able to express himself, but to prevent this topic from being threadjacked I'd like to dial us back toward the current international rise of a global "Occupy X" movement. It's hard enough to find a leader for the Occupy movement in the United States, let alone a global leader. I personally don't want a global leader.


...

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by drewprops Okay I'm glad that Marc was able to express himself, but to prevent this topic from being threadjacked I'd like to dial us back toward the current international rise of a global "Occupy X" movement. It's hard enough to find a leader for the Occupy movement in the United States, let alone a global leader. I personally don't want a global leader. ...

Does it need a leader though?

As soon as you have a leader, you are back into the realm of becoming the very thing you are overthrowing. Perhaps in todays world, a revolution is best without a leader, as there is no-one to control, or be manipluted or corrupted, or a false messiah.

It would be better if the people spontaneously organised themselves at the last minute through social networking. You cant mitigate against that - lack of control - it scares the hell out of the controllers.

By the time the cronies get to the point of having to shut down the entire internets, the critical point would have been passed for their replacement anyhow.

Or putting it another way, shutting down the internet is practically economic terrorism in todays connected world. Shutting it off brings their own demise a hell of a lot closer.

[drewprops]

Dude, it's just a philosophical circle jerk without administration. Somebody has to function in a leadership role and the "delicious, delicious revolution" is a great fat turd as soon as it's expected to do something grown-up, like make an economy work.


...

[chucker]

But Drew, crowd-sourcing has always been a great idea!

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by drewprops Dude, it's just a philosophical circle jerk without administration. Somebody has to function in a leadership role and the "delicious, delicious revolution" is a great fat turd as soon as it's expected to do something grown-up, like make an economy work. ...

Ok, thats your opinion, and obviously that needs to happen after the event. However looking at recent events, did a charismatoc leader emerge before the initial uprisings in Libya, Syria or Egypt - no, it was just a losely based rabble that had critical number to enact change because they were pissed off. Thats probably why it worked because dictators like to control with rules. Now we are seeing that they have to be grown-up if they want to establish their change. If not, some other little dictator or false messiah will step into the vacuum created by the last little dictator.

Controllers soon fall apart when no-one is playing by their rules. Yes you can kill everyone I suppose - if you can persuade your loyalists to open fire on their families and neighbours. History says that MO doesn't last long before the loyalists see the extent of their genocide. After all, even they are mostly human.

So why are we cheering revolution when foreigners overthrow their corrupt leaders, but if it was to happen to our corrupt leaders and system it is not allowed.?

Do you think there were scared people in these countries resigned to their fate and status-quo? They kind of got swept aside with the dinosaurs didn't they?

PS, do you think our economy is actually working? (Well it is in the sense that the mega-rich have just orchestrated the largest transfer of wealth into their own coffers)

I really dont understand why anyone except the 1% wants to maintain this system.

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by chucker But Drew, crowd-sourcing has always been a great idea!

I'm still waiting for your ideas,

Perhaps if you cant contribute, you could look at my list, and without trying to find nit-picky reasons why such an idea might be flawed, perhaps you could say 'generally' whether you agree with each idea or not.

Afterall, it is the struggling members of the forum you are thinking about isn't it?

I didn't see any struggling Norwegians or poverty when I was there for a couple of months last year. Nor did I when I visited Sweden, Finland or Iceland. Though im sure it does if you look very hard.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by !Marc! Perhaps if you cant contribute, you could look at my list, and without trying to find nit-picky reasons why such an idea might be flawed, perhaps you could say 'generally' whether you agree with each idea or not.

You could start explaining how politicians are supposed to get advised by experts while cutting out the experts. Or are you going to cut out the politicians, too?

Originally Posted by !Marc! I didn't see any struggling Norwegians or poverty when I was there for a couple of months last year. Nor did I when I visited Sweden, Finland or Iceland. Though im sure it does if you look very hard.

I didn't have to "look very hard" to find this.

In 2006 almost 8 per cent of all children under 18 years (85 000 children) in Norway were living in households defined as poor by the EU’s poverty measurement standard

That's way better than the US's 21%, but still a far cry of "Scandinavian model of equality, peace, education and prosperity for everyone". In grammar school, we started out in a class of 31. Are you telling me it's okay for almost two and a half of them to be poor?

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by chucker You could start explaining how politicians are supposed to get advised by experts while cutting out the experts. Or are you going to cut out the politicians, too? I didn't have to "look very hard" to find this. That's way better than the US's 21%, but still a far cry of "Scandinavian model of equality, peace, education and prosperity for everyone". In grammar school, we started out in a class of 31. Are you telling me it's okay for almost two and a half of them to be poor?

Clearly until you are able to differentiate between the polar opposites of bribing, corrupting, threatening corperate lobbyists that are acting on a profit and greed motivated interest of their unnacountable shadowy umbrella corperation VS independant non-profit appointed advisors tasked with serving the best interests of the national,public and environmental good....

....Yes we could argue about how we can best achieve that so called 'utopia', but while you doggedly stick to the line that these two diametrically opposed distinctions are actually indistinct, it will be impossible to have an intelligent conversation with you.


Au-revior Chucker. You win.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by !Marc! Clearly until you are able to differentiate between the polar opposites of bribing, corrupting, threatening corperate lobbyists that are acting on a profit and greed motivated interest of their unnacountable shadowy umbrella corperation VS independant non-profit appointed advisors tasked with serving the best interests of the national,public and environmental good….

Huh?

You're the one who said, and I quote: "Abolition of lobby groups". How am I the one with the polar opposites?

[El Gallo]

Originally Posted by !Marc! Something along the lines of Scandinavian model of equality, peace, education and prosperity for everyone. Highly regulated public positive money banking system, with a return to positive capitalism and positive investment. A 'Chinese' style democracy where the leaders are smart, educated people solely tasked with running a successful country, rather than running a successful re-election campaign. Abolition of lobby groups and other parasitic interest groups. Sustainable energy infrastructure program and phased out abolition of fossil fuels for primary energy. Socialized health care not provided by private companies and safety net. Complete rewrite of foreign policy, to unite and propser the world, rather than divide, conqueour and steal resources. Corperation profit limit, with excesses taxed for use in positive infrastructure, education and research developments For a start.

So in otherwords, fascism.

Originally Posted by drewprops Okay I'm glad that Marc was able to express himself, but to prevent this topic from being threadjacked I'd like to dial us back toward the current international rise of a global "Occupy X" movement. It's hard enough to find a leader for the Occupy movement in the United States, let alone a global leader. I personally don't want a global leader. ...

There won't be a leader because it isn't a real movement. A real movement would have a real agenda and a real purpose. This is a group of perma-advocates, many of who now have finally been laid off from their positions due to no ongoing "stimulus" allowing their respective state governments to keep them employed even with falling tax revenues and a bunch of young voters who voted for Obama and have never had a job due to the bad economy and also having no real skills. (I went to college to study ethnic/gender studies as an example)

Originally Posted by drewprops Dude, it's just a philosophical circle jerk without administration. Somebody has to function in a leadership role and the "delicious, delicious revolution" is a great fat turd as soon as it's expected to do something grown-up, like make an economy work....

Have you read the list of demands from the occupy website? It isn't about working at all. Most of them relate to becoming perma-students and never having to work. They can't have a leader because then they would have an agenda and if you have an agenda then the group splinters because right now the only common point is dissatisfaction.

The label is appropriate. They don't want to work. They want to occupy a place and be fed and cared for while doing nothing.

[!Marc!]

Originally Posted by MumboJumbo So in otherwords, fascism. .

I think we all know Trumptman, so no need to reply.

Au Revior Trumptman. You win. Have a rosette.

[chucker]

This is why we can't have nice things.

[!Marc!]

So does anyone want to make their case for continuing with the system and leadership status quo we have now?