UN's "One World Government" or "New World Order"

[Pathfinder]

FQ, one of the things you continue to miss is the fact that true revolutions are exactly that - revolutions. They overthrow the old ideas as well as the old way of doing things. Like when Washington was offered the US "Kingship" and refused.

I'm leaning more to Tom's way of thinking - bho has played his hand, the scumbags in kongress have come out of the woodwork, and the direction of what they are trying to do is plain and clear. The sheeple don't get it - yet, assuming they ever will. I now some who continue to buy into all of the liberal, statist "so-called "green" crap just because that's what the MSM tells them to do.

Consider this - perhaps Jefferson's famous quote about the Tree of Liberty needing to be watered periodically was intended specifically for the gentle soul fence-sitters like you to remind you that nothing of value ever comes easy. bho and his minions have destroyed this country's future, your future, as well as that of my granddaughter. What are you prepared to do about it?

Answer that one question before you post anything else here - you have dodged it in the past. And hopefully your answer won't be some nonsensical Mr. Rodgers / Rodney King lukewarm "can't we all just get along?" answer like "vote 'em out. The system is broken - intentionally - so what's left?

[JC5123]

FQ, It's thinking like yours that got us to this point in the first place. I am all for reading books, but at some point they should inspire you to do something worth writing a book about. Sitting on the fence and trying to make peace with everyone is what our government has been doing since Vietnam. We have the most powerful military that the planet has ever known, and yet, we can't win a war. Not because we are inferior, but because we lack the political will to do what has to be done to win.

Wars are won through strength of will, more than through strength of arms. The group of "terrorists" as you call us, has the will. Because they have a stake in this country. They are the ones who make the country great, and the ones who really do have something worth fighting for.

[fightingquaker13]

[
Consider this - perhaps Jefferson's famous quote about the Tree of Liberty needing to be watered periodically was intended specifically for the gentle soul fence-sitters like you to remind you that nothing of value ever comes easy. bho and his minions have destroyed this country's future, your future, as well as that of my granddaughter. What are you prepared to do about it?

Answer that one question before you post anything else here - you have dodged it in the past. And hopefully your answer won't be some nonsensical Mr. Rodgers / Rodney King lukewarm "can't we all just get along?" answer like "vote 'em out. The system is broken - intentionally - so what's left?
[/quote]
Path


If you find me to be either a "gentle soul" or a fence sitter, you obviously have not been reading my posts. I am neither. What I am is a hard eyed realist. Ideolgy and moral outrage are nice. Pragmatism gets things done. When it comes to fixing the system I am on board. Hell, I've spent 20 years of my life researching and teaching how broken it is. This does not change the fact that having an armed temper tantrum won't fix it. Revolutions fail far more often than they succeed. The common denominator? Lack of either active or passive support of the populace. If you can't persuade someone to mail in an absentee ballot from the comfort of their own home, what in the world makes you think you're going to get them to throw a molotov cocktail at well armed troops? Or not dime you out to a government they view as legitimate? Returning to Gramsci (who was a Marxist, but a damn smart one, the reason he was put in prison), he had well earned and undisguised scorn for children like Emma Goldman and Leon Trotsky who thought all you had to do to win a revolution was to storm the castle. They didn'y understand th fact thst a strong government relies on consent more than coercion. The fact is, if you could snap your fingers and kill every cop, soldier and Congressman tommorow, it wouldn't change a thing. The system would rebuild itself overnight. The only way to prevent that happening is to delegitimate it in the eyes of the people through fighting a war of ideas. Then, and only then will violence work. Otherwise you're wasting lives and ammo. Impatience and and frustration are poor substitutes for sound strategy. Its not about you and nothing worthwhile ever happened overnight.  First you win the heats and minds, then you kick ass if it is still nesessary. Getting the order wrong will accomplish nothing.
FQ13

[JC5123]

[
Consider this - perhaps Jefferson's famous quote about the Tree of Liberty needing to be watered periodically was intended specifically for the gentle soul fence-sitters like you to remind you that nothing of value ever comes easy. bho and his minions have destroyed this country's future, your future, as well as that of my granddaughter. What are you prepared to do about it?

Answer that one question before you post anything else here - you have dodged it in the past. And hopefully your answer won't be some nonsensical Mr. Rodgers / Rodney King lukewarm "can't we all just get along?" answer like "vote 'em out. The system is broken - intentionally - so what's left?

Path


If you find me to be either a "gentle soul" or a fence sitter, you obviously have not been reading my posts. I am neither. What I am is a hard eyed realist. Ideolgy and moral outrage are nice. Pragmatism gets things done. When it comes to fixing the system I am on board. Hell, I've spent 20 years of my life researching and teaching how broken it is. This does not change the fact that having an armed temper tantrum won't fix it. Revolutions fail far more often than they succeed. The common denominator? Lack of either active or passive support of the populace. If you can't persuade someone to mail in an absentee ballot from the comfort of their own home, what in the world makes you think you're going to get them to throw a molotov cocktail at well armed troops? Or not dime you out to a government they view as legitimate? Returning to Gramsci (who was a Marxist, but a damn smart one, the reason he was put in prison), he had well earned and undisguised scorn for children like Emma Goldman and Leon Trotsky who tho though all you had to do to win a revolution was to storm the castle. The fact is, if you could snap your fingers and kill every cop, soldier and Congressman tommorow, it wouldn't change a thing. The system would rebuild itself overnight. The only way to prevent that happening is to delegitimate it in the eyes of the people through fighting a war of ideas. Then, and only then will violence work. Otherwise you're wasting lives and ammo.
FQ13

HUH?

[ericire12]

HUH?

Comment of the day award!

[Sponsor]

[fightingquaker13]

HUH?

And that is your problem in one word JC.
If you don't create a climate favorable to revolution you will lose. That climate demands that at least a sizeable, solid and committed minority is willing to belive that the system is broken and needs to be replaced. The thing is, that's all that's required to win an election when turnout is generally less than 50%. You can't get folks out to vote, you're not going to get them going to war. Ideas first, action second, otherwise, you're screwed. Simple enough?
FQ13

[tombogan03884]

Tom, its true that ony about 3% fought. That's a little low, but sufficient, look at the numbers our military as a percentage of population. The thing is, that they had the active, or even just passive support of a large portion of our population. Mother's who would sendtheir sons to war, or provide supplies and food to our troops. Folks who would pay their tax money to the Colonials rather than the Brits, and a lot more folks who were prepared to accept them when they won, rather than rising in revolt against the "usurpers" and demanding that the Crown come back and fix the problem. Hell, even those who pulled a Sergeant Schultz were a vital part of the strugle. None of that can be accomplished by force of arms. If it could, the Brits would have won. I say again, you have to prepare the ground before you act or you will lose and lose hard. Again I reccomend Gramsci. You like to read and like history. I took a Ph.D level class that spent 6 weeks on that book. I consider it time and money well spent. I have taught it at least once a year every time I could get away with it. Consider it the AK of books, and PM me when you get a copy, because the table of contents is misleading and if you read it front to back it will make no sense. There is order to the thing, but the publisher wasn't smart enough to figure it out.
FQ13

Wrong again, Active civilian support never exceeded 15% of the population, the other 82% of the population either went with the wind, or, like the citizens of NY actively supported the British.

As to your later comment that you are "I am is a hard eyed realist."  who believes "Pragmatism gets things done." All I can say is that you lack the essential ruthlessness to be either realistic or pragmatic.
I have to agree with the others who have insinuated that you are in fact one of the sheep, who, rather than standing up and rocking the boat, sits clinging to the side hoping the water will be smoother after the waterfall .
As I have posted before, the primary problems with the current electoral process are that it grants an equal vote to every dipshit with a pulse, your vote means exactly the same as Cork's. Secondly the primary movers behind the socialist take over are people who never stand for election, but weild huge influence behind closed doors, George Soros, being one example and Micheal Steele another.

[ericire12]

POOP!

[fightingquaker13]

As to your later comment that you are "I am is a hard eyed realist."  who believes "Pragmatism gets things done." All I can say is that you lack the essential ruthlessness to be either realistic or pragmatic.
I have to agree with the others who have insinuated that you are in fact one of the sheep, who, rather than standing up and rocking the boat, sits clinging to the side hoping the water will be smoother after the waterfall .
As I have posted before, the primary problems with the current electoral process are that it grants an equal vote to every dipshit with a pulse, your vote means exactly the same as Cork's. Secondly the primary movers behind the socialist take over are people who never stand for election, but weild huge influence behind closed doors, George Soros, being one example and Micheal Steele another.

Tom, its not ruthlessness that I lack, I don't carry a gun for decoration. What I do lack is romanticism. I really don't see why the concept of having a solid committed minority of supporters who are willing to assist, if not fight is a problem. I also fail to see why you see no need to convince the "sheeple" (easy to convince by definintion, right) that at the very least passive acceptance of a revolutionary government is necessary, lest those same sheep grow fangs. Remember most Americans were pretty on board with FDR are and that didn't end well for Hitler or the Japs. Building a revolutionary movement is like building anything. You do all the planning and all the steps in order. Otherwise you just grab a hammer and FUBAR it. What part of that do you not get?
FQ13

[ericire12]

POOP!