Lumizen
Posts: 5
Joined: 11/10/2008
Status: offline
|
Speaking as an American, the qualification for armed rebellion has already been put to paper in one of the most incredible documents ever written, the Declaration of Independence.
"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government."
quote:
ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
Early thoughts:
Never. It has to be done at the ballot box.
In the event 30% of people agree with you and 70% do not, then your rebellion is forcing the 70% to agree with your version of freedom. In the event 70% agree with you, then you should be fine at the ballot box.
And, the perceived stupidity of the 70% is not a reasonable justfication to force them to be free.
The short-term answer: accept the limitations of mankind, and do not expect your countrymen to render themselves beholden to your standards.
The long-term answer for those who believe there is a problem that needs solving: Liberalism. Only an educated population can govern themselves, and the goal of an educated population necessitates redistribution of wealth. It's not pretty for some; it's unpalatable for many: let's call it the lesser of two evils and a spot of short-term pain in exchange for long-term gain.
During the American revolution, there were less than 10% of the populace involved in the event at any given time. As far as support, it was approximately 30%, and nearly the same number that were loyalists, with the rest not really having an opinion one way or the other so long as they were kept fat, dumb and happy. (parallel for today?)
I do agree with you on your theoretical parallel between majority rule in both violent and peaceful change. Of course, peaceful transition is preferable, nobody in any sort of right mind would wish to be plunged into human combat. However, when the powers that be have achieved such a stranglehold upon the mechanisms of power that it makes change impossible, and usurps the will of the people with no accountability to them, or else sells its intents with dishonest PR that would be the envy of 1938 Germany, it is the responsibility of those that are aware to save those that are not. No, 70% of the people are not stupid. I would place that at closer to 30% - 40%. The rest are a combination of ignorant, or blind followers of the lies that they have been told (insert your very apt quote on tradition here), or also as you said, so busied in just trying to make a good life for their families that they can't be bothered with matters of state. It would be nice if we did have an informed, educated populace that did all have an opinion of their own on every important matter.. but the fact is that we don't, and we never will. Realistically, about 10% of the people will make the rules for the other 90%... I choose to be in that 10%, and I know what side I fight on.
And Northern; Your definition of 'liberalism' (The modern one, also referred to as 'Progressivism', and confusing it with 'Classical Liberalism'. Classical Liberalism has absolutely NO redistributionist rhetoric in its definition, has the impossible utopian goal of pure Anarchy, and is closest to its realistic brother Libertarianism) sounds suspiciously like Socialism, the realistic attempt at its Utopian pipedream of Communism. It has been tried. It fails each and every time it is tried. Human nature itself makes it as impossible as Anarchy to maintain.
Taking the resources from those that produce, and handing it freely to those that do not, is the quickest way to eviscerate all productivity in a nation. I'm not saying that there aren't changes that need to be made; there are. Most of them involve deregulation that remove subsidies and sweetheart deals to certain companies and industries, and the strengthening of other 'anti-trust' policies that have been weakened in recent decades. Yes, I realize these are two entirely different things, but this is why I'm not a (pure) anarchist.
Water seeks its own level when it is left alone to do so as nature intended. Capitalism isn't perfect, but it is the best thing that anyone has ever come up with, and it it how the US rose to the top of the food chain at one time. Where she sits now, I'll leave to another debate.
"The tree of liberty must be refershed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants alike"
-Thomas Jefferson
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -Attributed to Benjamin Franklin, 1759
< Message edited by Lumizen -- 11/18/2008 12:47:57 PM >
|
RE: When is rebellion justifiable, or is it never justi... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread