US needs a political revolution...

This is an old article but I found it to be quite moving. It is by congressman Bernie Sanders and it is in regards to the fledgling state of American politics and the revolution that is needed to revitalize our democracy and nation:

http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0817-05.htm

The problem is that their is way too much apathy among the citizens of this country for a revolution to occur. Things will have to get much worse than they are now in order for people to come together and demand change.

Sadly, I agree...

The libertarian grassroots movement is gaining moment. People won't be apathetic forever.

I agree with Bernie Sanders. It says a lot that an open democratic socialist can be elected to the Senate. I hope we see more Bernie Sanders in office. Then his message may he some ears to fall upon.

From my favorite president:

“When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong.”

Click to expand...

“The most heroic word in all languages is revolution.”

Click to expand...

- Eugene Debs

Revolution will never happen. The politicians would use all force to stop that from happening. If any politicion in this country cared about the citizens as a whole they would do what the majority wanted them to do and not what they wanted to do.

There will be a fight, one that the american public is not an never will be prepared for.

Moey said:

Revolution will never happen. The politicians would use all force to stop that from happening. If any politicion in this country cared about the citizens as a whole they would do what the majority wanted them to do and not what they wanted to do.

Click to expand...

Only if this were a democracy, which it isn't, so that (thankfully) will never happen.

"Democratic socialism" can anyone say oxymoron? Sorry but I am not to keen on this new "revolution". Which would require us as citizens to give up freedoms for the illusion of security.

Let me get this straight. All you anti-gun people want to have a revolution? With what, squirt guns? Many of you don't even have the stomach for a war people volunteered to fight and would like to stay and win.

Students at VT stood still and waited their turn to get shot. If people can't even put up a fight when their lives are at stake, what makes you think they have the stomach for a revolution?

If you ever mustered the courage to even try something like that, you would quickly find out that there are people just waiting for that day. I don't believe if we had a regime change in this country, it would move towards a more politically correct nation.

Let me get this straight. All you anti-gun people want to have a revolution? With what, squirt guns? Many of you don't even have the stomach for a war people volunteered to fight and would like to stay and win.

Click to expand...

Straw man. Pro-gun control is not the same as anti-gun. Also, I distinctly remember MLK winning his revolution by preaching a message of non-violence.

Engaging in a war is easy. Falling back on peace is a true challenge.

"Democratic socialism" can anyone say oxymoron?

Click to expand...

Actually, it's redundant.

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

Click to expand...

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

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.

Click to expand...

- 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.

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.

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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?

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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