Real_Trouble
Posts: 471
Joined: 2/25/2008 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HunterS Some how you seem to perceive a difference between one revolution and another revolution. One as being legitimate and one as being illegitimate. Yet you do not seem to list any criteria other than your bias. If you were to study the history of our country you would notice that it is filled with rebellions not unlike the ones in Russia. You point to a "legitimate" revolution as one which protects the people....I am sure you are not unaware of how the Native American was not protected. I am sure you are not unaware of how the African Americans were not protected. I am sure you are not unaware of how the Mexican Americans were not protected. You may be less familiar with how Asian Americans were not protected. You cannot be unaware of how female Americans were not protected. Puuuleeeezzzzze...legitimate revolution...give me a break. A rebellion is an attempt to overthrow the existing government. A revolution is a successful rebellion. H. I don't intend to come off as rude here, but do you even know what you are talking about? To wit: I am not speaking of legitimate or illegitimate revolutions. You need to go re-read what I posted. I am speaking of legitimate and illegitimate states, and I have very broadly defined those as ones which look out for the best interests of a majority of the people in a general fashion and ones which do not do so. That's not a terribly hard criteria to understand, and I'm not sure why you are going off on a revolution swag. Second, the indigenous peoples of the Americas were very definitely not protected; for the most part, they were not considered members of the state, either. American history is filled with denials of rights / humanity / legitimacy for various indigenous tribes. Jackson himself told the supreme court to fuck off when they tried to protect them, in fact, on the basis that they weren't "Americans". Likewise, as bitter as you might want to be about America (and it's far from perfect, nor am I holding it up as some sort of perfect paragon of a state - see my commentary about our blatant idiocy in Iraq and Afghanistan for evidence of this), it sure beats the hell out of a lot of other places. There are very few places I'd rather live than America, because as bad as it might be here, it's often a hell of a lot worse elsewhere. That's not an excuse for mediocrity, but rather an acceptance of how ugly and brutal humans are, on average. Point is, I'm not sure what your revolution kick is aimed at. The point I am making, which is incontrovertibly true and very well supported by history is this: If the government of a given region is egregiously corrupt or tyrannical, it will almost always eventually be overthrown. Often by other corrupt tyrant types, but occasionally not. In Afghanistan, we are supporting an inept, corrupt government ultimately being run by various factional warlords that act as tyrants. This is the same mistake we've made repeatedly in the past, and more of the same that got us to where we are in the first place. I suggest this is stupid.
_____________________________
Send lawyers, guns, and money.
|