Even half a million or more people in New York in 2003 didn't slow down Bush's stupid war, which leads me to believe maybe we should begin discussing a diversity of methods besides the good ol' tried and true.
The alternative is armed insurrection. But seeing how you leftists are all for gun control. I somehow doubt things will work out for you in that scenario.
Unimaginative to assume the only way to resist one's own government is through guns. Lots of ways you can put monkey wrenches into the machine. Nationwide strikes comes to mind. But then, you "rightists" have been anti-union now for decades.
But they use the whole left-right propaganda to divide Americans. We also need to get beyond labeling someone a leftist or rightist. The common enemy of ordinary Americans are the Elite psychopathic assholes running this country right now into the ground. These same psychopaths are expecting violence, because that is all they understand. And violence will only play into their hands. Why general civil disobedience, such as what Thoreau wrote about is far more effective than guns.
A tad harsh but.......... we need harsh to wake us up : ) I do believe hearing the speeches Sun. people are starting to believe WE fight together , WE win together. Single issue division has worked so well for the 1% for centuries. I have more in common with a homeless, quadriplegic, female, heroin addicted, unemployed person than the 1% and when more of us discover that fact WE WIN : ) The Rail Workers were the opportunity for General Strike and I thought it could happen. Then the money flowed to the right pockets and crushed any benefits to workers. Kshama Sawant's Workers strike back .org is hope for me : ) Psychopathic Assholes sums it up for me : ) Much Love and Solidarity : )
The alternative is noncooperation with the corporate death cult. Protest builds awareness in the population, but the machine will run along just fine as long as the populace works its levers and greases its gears. The only thing our vampire class fears is economic warfare. A ten day general strike could win us concessions it would take our predators a hundred years to claw back.
Concessions are the problem. You really have to destroy their ability to have power over you, or they will work, in the typical style of problem-solving tool-using beings, toward undoing the conditions that make resistance possible. Caitlin's essays on psychology and philosophy provide these tools to readers, but their effectiveness as armor rests on broad distribution.
The utility of organized violence depends on the aims of the activists. I can't get what I want by participating in a military organization (the only truly effective social formation for violence) because of my hippie-anarcho-commie ideas, but an authoritarian nationalist certainly could, or maybe even a liberal under some circumstances. Notice, though, how the liberals defending "Western values" got on a slippery slope somewhere between World War 2 and the present.
You would probably call me a leftist, but I am well armed and proficient. Take it from an old man who has fallen for every trick in the book at one point or another: it is propaganda that teaches us to label each other instead of meeting man to man.
The problem is patriarchy that is aggressive, competitive and violent. Balance is needed. Time to meet woman to woman, woman to man... Enough of only man to man already!
Certainly concur about patriarchy and all its idiot insistence on female subjugation.
As for woman to woman and woman to man, thanks for the sensitivity training, but the sexual division is meaningless in this context. That's why I left it out.
I reckon the patriarchy done it, but it is not my fault that the word 'man' is not gender-trapped, or that the word 'woman' is. When I use the word brother or man, I refer to everyone of both sexes, every age, every gender, every creed, every heritage.
The word woman, whether we like it or not, is an explicitly sexual reference that defines a subset of mankind by its sex. When sexuality is not the subject, insisting that it must be introduced sexualizes women more, not less. In other words, separating us into sexes when chatting about non-sexual subjects is exquisitely, quintessentially, sexist. In one man's opinion.
My wife, with whom I've been in stupid ga ga love since 1975, is womanhood incarnate, and she (female, uterus-having she) is also the best man I've ever known. Everything I've ever looked up to in a man, she exemplifies. I'm not demeaning her or my other female brothers with that silly, awkward, foolish, and self-defeating sexist requirement: I don't, and I won't.
Even half a million or more people in New York in 2003 didn't slow down Bush's stupid war, which leads me to believe maybe we should begin discussing a diversity of methods besides the good ol' tried and true.
The alternative is armed insurrection. But seeing how you leftists are all for gun control. I somehow doubt things will work out for you in that scenario.
Unimaginative to assume the only way to resist one's own government is through guns. Lots of ways you can put monkey wrenches into the machine. Nationwide strikes comes to mind. But then, you "rightists" have been anti-union now for decades.
But they use the whole left-right propaganda to divide Americans. We also need to get beyond labeling someone a leftist or rightist. The common enemy of ordinary Americans are the Elite psychopathic assholes running this country right now into the ground. These same psychopaths are expecting violence, because that is all they understand. And violence will only play into their hands. Why general civil disobedience, such as what Thoreau wrote about is far more effective than guns.
A tad harsh but.......... we need harsh to wake us up : ) I do believe hearing the speeches Sun. people are starting to believe WE fight together , WE win together. Single issue division has worked so well for the 1% for centuries. I have more in common with a homeless, quadriplegic, female, heroin addicted, unemployed person than the 1% and when more of us discover that fact WE WIN : ) The Rail Workers were the opportunity for General Strike and I thought it could happen. Then the money flowed to the right pockets and crushed any benefits to workers. Kshama Sawant's Workers strike back .org is hope for me : ) Psychopathic Assholes sums it up for me : ) Much Love and Solidarity : )
The alternative is noncooperation with the corporate death cult. Protest builds awareness in the population, but the machine will run along just fine as long as the populace works its levers and greases its gears. The only thing our vampire class fears is economic warfare. A ten day general strike could win us concessions it would take our predators a hundred years to claw back.
Concessions are the problem. You really have to destroy their ability to have power over you, or they will work, in the typical style of problem-solving tool-using beings, toward undoing the conditions that make resistance possible. Caitlin's essays on psychology and philosophy provide these tools to readers, but their effectiveness as armor rests on broad distribution.
The utility of organized violence depends on the aims of the activists. I can't get what I want by participating in a military organization (the only truly effective social formation for violence) because of my hippie-anarcho-commie ideas, but an authoritarian nationalist certainly could, or maybe even a liberal under some circumstances. Notice, though, how the liberals defending "Western values" got on a slippery slope somewhere between World War 2 and the present.
Not the only alternative. However, you are right there are fewer than I think.
You would probably call me a leftist, but I am well armed and proficient. Take it from an old man who has fallen for every trick in the book at one point or another: it is propaganda that teaches us to label each other instead of meeting man to man.
The problem is patriarchy that is aggressive, competitive and violent. Balance is needed. Time to meet woman to woman, woman to man... Enough of only man to man already!
Certainly concur about patriarchy and all its idiot insistence on female subjugation.
As for woman to woman and woman to man, thanks for the sensitivity training, but the sexual division is meaningless in this context. That's why I left it out.
I reckon the patriarchy done it, but it is not my fault that the word 'man' is not gender-trapped, or that the word 'woman' is. When I use the word brother or man, I refer to everyone of both sexes, every age, every gender, every creed, every heritage.
The word woman, whether we like it or not, is an explicitly sexual reference that defines a subset of mankind by its sex. When sexuality is not the subject, insisting that it must be introduced sexualizes women more, not less. In other words, separating us into sexes when chatting about non-sexual subjects is exquisitely, quintessentially, sexist. In one man's opinion.
My wife, with whom I've been in stupid ga ga love since 1975, is womanhood incarnate, and she (female, uterus-having she) is also the best man I've ever known. Everything I've ever looked up to in a man, she exemplifies. I'm not demeaning her or my other female brothers with that silly, awkward, foolish, and self-defeating sexist requirement: I don't, and I won't.
I agree that Roman culture has bequeathed to us some quite harmful ideas, including among others the notion of the family as a toy sovereign monarchy.
I don't see that as particularly Roman.