US needs a political revolution... (America, Article, Zen)

[The Seeker]

Let me get this straight. All you anti-gun people want to have a revolution? With what, squirt guns?

Why does a revolution have to involve guns? MLK led a revolution without killing anyone.

[GeneCosta]

In 1989, thirteen nations comprising 1,695,000,000 people experienced nonviolent revolutions that succeeded beyond anyone's wildest expectations ... If we add all the countries touched by major nonviolent actions in our century (the Philippines, South Africa ... the independence movement in India ...) the figure reaches 3,337,400,000, a staggering 65% of humanity! All this in the teeth of the assertion, endlessly repeated, that nonviolence doesn't work in the 'real' world.

- Dr. Walter Wink

If we look at violent revolutions, few achieve anything spectacular. Most occurring in the past 100 years contributed to such grand inventions as the Soviet Union, fascist Italy, communist China, and the Republic of Iran. Violence begets more violence.

[Reverend Rick]

MLK was a great man. He might have been non violent, but his life was taken very violently. Before you shoot my straw man down (pun intended), you might start a revolution non violently, but it would end up being violent because people are just waiting for this to happen.

Remember the riots in California about Rodney King? When that police officer got away with what he did in court, people thought there would be more riots, but there were not. That is because people knew if there was another riot, people were ready this time and it would have got very ugly.

The real straw man is all this revolution talk. You can't get the majority to show up and vote much less have a revolution. Do you really believe the minority is going to control the majority?

Give things another 25 years. You all will run the world then and you can have a turn at messing it up just like everyone before you has. Your children will tell you how you just don't understand and we need a revolution.

[GeneCosta]

MLK was a great man. He might have been non violent, but his life was taken very violently. Before you shoot my straw man down (pun intended), you might start a revolution non violently, but it would end up being violent because people are just waiting for this to happen.

Yes, violence would most likely occur, but the responcibility always falls on the aggressors. Non-violence movements should never be blamed for rogue elements and the opposition's violence.

Remember the riots in California about Rodney King? When that police officer got away with what he did in court, people thought there would be more riots, but there were not. That is because people knew if there was another riot, people were ready this time and it would have got very ugly.

Riots are something completely different. I'm not seeing the connection between the Rodney King incident and MLK's peace marches.

The real straw man is all this revolution talk. You can't get the majority to show up and vote much less have a revolution. Do you really believe the minority is going to control the majority?

What control? When people stand up and actually take on cause, people listen. Influence and control are completely different.

Give things another 25 years. You all will run the world then and you can have a turn at messing it up just like everyone before you has. Your children will tell you how you just don't understand and we need a revolution.

I'd rather break the cycle and have it broken now.