Professional Soldiers ®

Professional Soldiers ® (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Discussions (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=46)
-   -   Pollster: Americans are Pre-Revolutionary (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34637)

Paslode 10-07-2011 09:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant (Post 417602)
Chairman Mao would be proud.....

Of our bureaucrats, politicians and thieves like Immelt & Blankfein.........yes he would be.

Box 10-07-2011 10:57

Quote:

This is a group of mostly leftist looney-toon types I'd say, along with ignorant young people who don't really know any better (the kind wearing designer clothing and carrying iPods, iPads, laptops, etc...while calling for the downfall of capitalism and Wall Street). I do not think it at all represents mainstream America.
-Rosanne Barr is a flat-out communist-socialist though, she too doesn't represent broader America I'd say, just a small very radical fringe
-Ordinary working Americans are not going to riot.
-Also, ordinary Americans are not as dumb as folks like Jay Leno like to show them to be.
I agree with you 100%...

The "occupation" crowd is exactly how you describe them, they are a bunch of modern day hippies "...wearing designer clothing and carrying iPods, iPads, laptops, etc...while calling for the downfall of capitalism"

However, I am also sure that you agree that it was not "mainstream England" that fought against the King during the American Revolution...

People like Jay Leno and Rosanne Barr act as though mainstream America is too stupid to come in out of the rain (and they have something we dont, a media platform that gives them the power of perception.)...

It was not "mainstream Europe" that caused two world wars...

It was not "mainstream Islam" that flew commercial airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon... (at least that's what I have been told)

It was not mainstream America that bombed the Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City...

It is my opinion that the occupation of wall street crowd is the modern day incarnation of the hippies that protested "the man" back in the 60's...
Now those hippies from the 60's are in government jobs fucking up our economy as they practice their favorite forms of corruption.

Where is the occupation of wall street crowd (with their ipods and cell phones) going to be in ten years? The Barrs and Sarandons and Baldwins and Moores and Penns encourage and even glorify this type of behavior. They have the benefit of using their celebrity status to lend credibility to their nutty opinions. They show up at events with an entourage and some TV cameras, they make a speech, incite the crowd, and then they retire to their castles while the peasants continue protest for the cause. (whatever that cause may be)

Again, just my opinion, but in the 60's the country wrote off "hippies" as being a harmless bunch of potheads that would eventually kill themselves off with drug overdoses and syphilis...
...instead, the hippies finished college and gave birth to a new generation of smarter, techno savvy hippies with better drugs. Smelly, dope smoking, misguided hippies that need "the man" to provide them with iPODS and cell phone so they can post to Facebook while they protest "the man"


Just my observation.

Dusty 10-07-2011 11:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy L-bach (Post 417649)
I agree with you 100%...
The Barrs and Sarandons and Baldwins and Moores and Penns encourage and even glorify this type of behavior. They have the benefit of using their celebrity status to lend credibility to their nutty opinions.

And Obama understands it. Community agitating on a national level.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-economy.html

Intel Cop 10-07-2011 13:31

This link lays out some of the connections between the Occupy protestors and the big money liberals (including Obama):

http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2011/10/0...confrontation/

It is a shame that we don't see this type of anger/frustration pointed right where it belongs - the government - instead of towards the industry that almost single-handedly keeps NYC going and employs thousands in the region.

Broadsword, I agree with your assertions regarding the average American, but want to add a further point. The regular people who work, take care of their families, and go about their daily lives, maybe slightly affected by the current economy but not put out on the streets, are still incredibly comfortable and don't have to worry about necessities. It is highly unlikely that we would see European-style, large scale riots unless the "average American" began to have problems securing necessities, no matter how connected to and frustrated by the political process we are.

On a side note, I'm hoping to get some overtime from these protestors before they peter out or find themselves evicted from the private park they are currently "occupying". As of yet, I haven't been sent down there.

Paslode 10-07-2011 14:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 417624)
Who? You mean the heads of large corporations? People can push for additional regulations over corporate CEOs if they want. When have the heads of corporations not been solely concerned with profit and job security? That's why we have a framework of laws and regulations and other forms of oversight and limits on how corporations can finance politicians and so forth. Also, how do they "abuse the people?" That is why we have labor laws, regulations, unions, etc...where needed. Revolution isn't going to fix human nature.

The point is, we have created bureaucracies (FDIC, SEC, FHA, OTS, etc.) as safe guards and our bureaucrats and elected officials do not enforce the laws and regulations we have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 417624)
Also remember, the primary purpose of a corporation is to be concerned over profit.

Even at the detriment of the nation best interest or national security?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 417624)
We don't have some fixed aristocracy at the top like France in the 1700s though.

Not exactly, but we do have at least two sets of standards were as the Rule of Law is selectively enforced. You and I both know that if we ran our business like the Federal Government we would be bankrupt and in court. If we mislead customers and took their money we would end up in Jail. If we don't pay our taxes the IRS will confiscate everything we own and put us in jail without much conversation.....unless you have the means to legally thwart the authorities.




Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 417624)
A Constitutional Republic is a liberal democracy. Liberal democracy is representative democracy. It is a democratic system that adheres to classically liberal values (human rights and freedoms, protection of the majority from the minority and the minority from the majority, etc...).

You are at least in the same ball park from what I read, though there may be subtle differences that set them apart. It deserves further investigation on my part.



Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 417624)
In modern liberal democracies, that's usually the case from what I have seen. That is why creating a European-style social democracy is dangerous over the long term, because it creates such a mindset among most of the population. Witness Britain recently. In modern America, the people who riot tend to either be very poor people who want to vent (often for reasons of racial tensions, such as the 1960s Watts riots or the 1992 LA riots) or just people with nothing better to do who want to cause trouble (like these Occupy Wall Street protesters charging the police).

Ordinary working Americans are not going to riot. If they are truly disenfranchised with the government, they will hold massive protests and rallies, but not riot. The government then will respond to their concerns or it will get voted out. Now if the government refused to do anything to help the people and was some fixed aristocracy or something and people were starving, then yes, I could see rioting occurring then.

Ordinary working folks are far less likely to riot.....but I do believe they would revolt if pushed, for say not listening to the wishes of the people and when elections fail to provide results........and it has been mentioned on several occasions on this board, by others that we are voting for the lesser of two evils and that increasingly there is little difference our two political parties.



Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 417624)
I would still ask them, "What is a revolution going to accomplish?" The system is obviously flawed, so its our job as a people to demand it get fixed (which the Democrats could claim is what they're already trying to do with the massive financial legislation President Obama signed into law). After the 1929 stock market crash, when the banking and financial system was virtually unregulated, it was discovered that massive corruption had occurred. So some heavy-dtuy financial regulation was passed. People were starving during the 1930s during the Great Depression, so various social safety nets were created. Revolution wasn't needed because the government responded to the people.

Obviously we have learned little, in the 80's we had the S&L crisis and 20 years later we have multiple boondoggles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 417624)
Part of the reason peoples' pensions and savings were emptied is because of the financial crisis, which itself goes back to the government trying to give everyone a home through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (i.e. governmental policy a good deal caused the problem in the first place).

The government did as you say, but they didn't create the fraud like junk MBS that were sold multiple times to investors.



Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 417624)
To some people perhaps, but ordinary Americans do not like extremists (or people they perceive as extremists anyway). Calling for revolution is an extremist tactic. Also, ordinary Americans are not as dumb as folks like Jay Leno like to show them to be. I think the average person with a family is smart enough to raise an eyebrow and say, "I am sick of the people running our government, but how is a revolution going to improve anything?"


People don't like getting screwed either. It is one thing to get screwed and have some recourse, but when individuals like Monzilo and Cassano are living the high life, you are scraping to make ends meet because your nest egg was pilfered and your Government is doing little to nothing to bring the crooks to justice......what is extreme?


Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 417624)
I wouldn't say we are bankrupt. We are in some tough economic times, with some big problems, but far from bankrupt.

How many centuries and generations will it take to pay off this debt? Could you operate your business in a similar fashion and keep doors open?

NO.

GratefulCitizen 10-07-2011 18:43

Michelle Malkin's take:
http://townhall.com/columnists/miche...of_icapitalism

These protests remind me of something my grandfather said.
About thirty years ago, he was watching the television, listening to newsmen bemoan the early '80s economy.

He didn't understand it.
Growing up quite poor during the depression, fighting with the 1st Marines in Guadalcanal and Cape Gloucester, and struggling to provide for his family during the post-war recession and inflation must have given him a different perspective.

He just got up from his chair, shook his head, and said: "The problem with people today is they don't have any real problems".

GratefulCitizen 10-07-2011 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy L-bach (Post 417649)
Again, just my opinion, but in the 60's the country wrote off "hippies" as being a harmless bunch of potheads that would eventually kill themselves off with drug overdoses and syphilis...
...instead, the hippies finished college and gave birth to a new generation of smarter, techno savvy hippies with better drugs. Smelly, dope smoking, misguided hippies that need "the man" to provide them with iPODS and cell phone so they can post to Facebook while they protest "the man"


Just my observation.

If they let them assemble in large groups for too long, we might have a bigger problem:
A music festival.

http://www.southparkstudios.com/full...die-hippie-die

Paslode 10-07-2011 22:03

Back on this...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 (Post 417624)
A Constitutional Republic is a liberal democracy. Liberal democracy is representative democracy. It is a democratic system that adheres to classically liberal values (human rights and freedoms, protection of the majority from the minority and the minority from the majority, etc...).

I believe the two forms of government are similar, but are very different in one way as John Adams defined it ' a constitutional republic as "a government of laws, and not of men.' Where as Democracy, is defined by majority rule.

Democracy (in any form) is not mentioned in either the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution or even the Pledge of Allegiance.

Liberal (Liberalism (is the belief in the importance of liberty and equal rights) Democracy (is a form of government in which all people have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives)

Constitutional (A constitution is a set of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organization is governed.[1] These rules together make up, i.e. constitute, what the entity is. When these principles are written down into a single or set of legal documents, those documents may be said to comprise a written constitution.)

Republic (form of government, in which the people, or some significant portion of them, have supreme control over the government)

They may be similar but they are not the same. So somewhere along the line someone decided to pervert or revised the facts as to what form of Government the United States is and/or was intended to be.



Thomas Jefferson said of Democracy, “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”

OWS......it may become a mob trying to achieve that 51% majority so it can write itself a paycheck ;)

akv 10-07-2011 22:45

Interesting Times
 
3 Attachment(s)
" Turn the machines back on..."

bubba 10-07-2011 23:36

I wonder what those people would do (along with every sane person in this country) would do if those "evil corporations" just said "hey, you win, we quit, everyone who works for us is fired, we are going to Tahiti and drinking mi-ties till dooms day...". How about a 70% unemployment rate and a GDP of less than 90% of current......... on second thought, that may be exactly what they want...... humm........

scooter 10-09-2011 12:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by bubba (Post 417776)
I wonder what those people would do (along with every sane person in this country) would do if those "evil corporations" just said "hey, you win, we quit, everyone who works for us is fired, we are going to Tahiti and drinking mi-ties till dooms day...". How about a 70% unemployment rate and a GDP of less than 90% of current......... on second thought, that may be exactly what they want...... humm........

The Atlas Shrugged premise... I'm not sure that the people in question really understand what those 'Greedy' Corporations really provide, or the 'Evil Rich' for that matter. The same groups that bemoan corporations and jobs relocating overseas are the same ones to cry over their profit motive. Look at California, where increased taxation and regulation led to a mass exodus of buisness to Nevada.

I'm not sure that these protests are really representative of the populace writ large anyway. The numbers are too small comparitively. I do agree that they are probably being organized nationally by the same people though. Just my .02.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 19:07.


Copyright 2004-2026 by Professional Soldiers ®