There won't be a revolution.

[sibelian]

Firstly, revolutions are dangerous. People get killed, injured, buildings get damaged. Not playing nice. Most ordinary people prefer to play nice.

Secondly, the circumstances under which a revolution would take place are not there, in other words, actual death through actual starvation and a clear narrative path through which the populace can hear such stories and develop an appropriate societal response, which response would never be forthcoming in current western society anyway, because...

Thirdly, the underclass must in some sense be unified by an at least similar set of moral tenets for the revolutionary fevrour to be widely legitimised. A nation entranced by opinions and disagreement at every level will not congeal into a revolutionary force.

Fourthly, there needs to be a socially established vision of a replacement for whatever the revolution is going to kick out of the way. There isn't.

Fifthly, well, you know, it's a lot of hassle.

The right wing twits who think armed revolution is going to fix anything are going to be in for a nasty surprise if they pick any kind of fight witht he US gov. Starbucks + co have paid a lot of money for that gov.

The rest of us... well. Deep down we all know that revolutions don't really work.

[HiPointDem]

1. not sure if you're serious or not, but starvation isn't a necessary condition for revolution.

historically, revolutions have been made by a rising class or power against a declining class or power, using the 'peasants' as pawns.

and the 'socially established vision' doesn't have to be so very socially established or coherent either.

[sibelian]

5. Well...

Perhaps my definition of revolution is too narrow. I'm distinguishing it from "coup" or "civil war"?

Most of the really big revolutions we've seen, any of the oens where something substanive actually changed are almost always facilitated by the extant social structure failing to meet basic needs in some way. I suppose by "death by starvation" I really mean "inescapable deprivation" in some form or another, or at least the perception of the same, and while there is deprivation, I don't think it's currently perceived as inescapable. The "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" ideology is strong in all western societies. I should have been clearer.

"and the 'socially established vision' doesn't have to be so very socially established or coherent either." - yes, that's true but it has to at least exist. If we're talking about a revolution from our side, I have seen nothing anywhere that purports to replace the capitalism we're all so irritated by, nor do I see anything on the side of the right wing twits

Do you count the fall of the Berlin Wall? Or the Arab Spring?

[Recursion]

7. Bread and circuses do a lot

20% of the US population receives food vouchers or in-kind food from the government, along with the various other transfer programs (reduced as they are).

This is pretty much explicitly the anti-revolutionary design of the New Deal: give the people with the most reason to rise up a stake in keeping the status quo.

[HiPointDem]

8. I'm thinking of the bourgeois revolutions; including the american revolution. the various communist

revolutions (starvation didn't feature in most of them, and where it did, there was nothing to distinguish it from hundreds of years of starvation in the same areas...)

the social structure failing to meet needs is a routine periodic feature of most historic large-scale societies. bread riots, etc. may follow but to get revolution, something more is needed.

[Recursion]

2. Historically revolutions happen when things get slightly better

Though I do think it's fair to say that no nation with an obesity epidemic like ours has had a revolution.

[LeftInTX]

4. Or a nation that is glued to reality TV

[Recursion]

6. The true opiate of the masses (nt)

[dogknob]

15. Revolt? Whaddya mean you want me to revolt?

I'm too fat to be revolting.

Besides, Duck Dynasty's on...

[greyl]

3. False. In 50 years, if we're still around, we will be living in a revolutionary way.

How we're living now sure as hell won't sustain us for that long.

[freshwest]

9. People have forgotten that, like it or not, the ballot is a revolution. Not flashy. If every person

in this country was involved in the process, the government would be changed in a way that meets the revolutionary desires of most people.

Many have believed that we can passively buy a consumer product in government once every few years and that is all we are required to do. So we have not gotten involved.

We are living in an increasingly faster reactionary revolution right now, going state by state. The progressives who brought us many of the civil rights we had over the last half century did it not by standing apart, but by getting elected.

The American people have left politics for various reasons, but politics will not leave us alone. The luxury of years of doing other things has been devoured by the regressive forces.

They show up at every level, from the office of dogcatcher to school board that I find no liberal or progressive wants to be in. So they are changing this country from the bottom up. It's been the Reagan revolution ever since.

The call to man the barricades and for general strike won't happen because people are too busy with many things which are not in the government. Government of one kind or another will never disappear as long as mankind is diverse and resources will be divides up by those who show up for them.

There is the governance of families, schools, churches, companies, universities, social activities. In most of those the structure is a heirarchy that is implicitly agreed upon or else mythologized to keep it hidden.

Only in a representative form of government with commonly held ideas can we agree to be on an equal playing field. There is no one man who will take care of things for us as in a dictatorship.

As people see power flowing to these others entities, they may want a strong man to save them. No one man or woman is going to save all of us as that is a joint pursuit. If there is no consensus to join to govern, demagogues rule.

Just a few thoughts as I haul off with another sinus head ache. I may not be in the same ball park you are, either. but I feel you stated your case in the OP very well. NIght.

[HiPointDem]

11. "The American people have left politics for various reasons" -- mainly because the rulers have

rigged all the openings.

[olddots]

10. I hope you're right

unfortunately humans don't learn from history because most of it is bullshit tossed at fools.

[davidn3600]

12. History proves that governments are very fragile organisms

At the height of the Roman empire, I imagine it would be difficult to convince a citizen of Rome that the empire will eventually collapse. They would think you are crazy. Yet that is exactly what happened. Just like today it's difficult to find anyone in the mainstream that would admit the USA could one day fall...but history proves that it likely will. We like to think that our government is very strong and invincible. We are different from the rest of history's failed civilizations. We have amazing economic might. We have amazing military strength. And we are incredibly patriotic and loyal people. But practically all empires had all those things too, yet they still fell to pieces.

Soviet Union is another example. In 1970, how many people believed the USSR was going to collapse in 22 years?

Could the USA collapse in 10 years? 20 years? 50 years? What makes you so certain that it won't? Governments like to project an aura of dominance and invincibility. And its people like to believe in its propaganda. But in reality, governments are incredibly weak and could collapse very easily in a number of different ways.

Considering the problems that we (and the world) are going to be faced with in the next 100 years, some are actually saying this could be one of the more difficult periods of human history.
-Overpopulation is going to be a major, major issue going forward. The UN estimates 9-10 billion people by 2050.
-We have global warming to worry about. It's impact on the future could be devastating and could change economies and entire social structures.
-We are 99% dependent on natural resources for our energy needs. These energy sources are not stable for the long term. They are finite and will one day be depleted, but they are also subject to market forces that can lead to rapid price increases that could destabilize the economy.
-Wealth disparity is becoming a problem in most places, including the United States. The middle class continues to shrink and the rich are getting richer. Our manufacturing sector is destroyed. We have nothing for the nation to fall back on because we don't produce much any more that other nations want or need.

We got massive problems in the future.

[Bonobo]

13. History called.

They said they've heard that before and just wanted to let you know.

[cali]

14. A revolution at this moment may be unlikely but

there are too many variables to say that about next year or 5 years from now or 10. The trajectory we're currently on doesn't look very sustainable to me. That doesn't mean that there will be a revolution but it can't be counted out either.