Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I read, in another thread, the following statement ... [View all]G_j
(40,569 posts)128. it shouldn't be about the left, it should be the the about the 99%.
A strike should not exclude voting, which is important in my view. However, I don't see it ever happening here. A general strike would be far more intelligent than some nebulous 'mass rebellion'. Still, it aint going to happen.
In my humble opinion, we've already gone beyond the pale. Democracy is dead, the noble experiment has been sabotaged.
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
149 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Good point, and if someone says they wont vote, please tell me at least you are running
randys1
Jan 2015
#77
Bingo! Add to this that for any 'revolution' to succeed, a base of at least 3-5% of
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#11
It's a bit early this a.m. and I'm still working on my first cup of joe, but I don't
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#15
Ah, no offense taken. (I thought maybe I'd missed some crucial contextual clue.) The historical
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#20
Before I forget about this post, let me tell you I am a fan now...you wrote that so well
randys1
Jan 2015
#59
Well, I think the leaders of the original Black Panther Party (the Socialists Huey Newton, Bobby
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#108
Definitely a valid consideration. An Italian social theorist named Pareto enunciated just
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#26
If you want the military to allow the revolution, you need to convince a lot of them
muriel_volestrangler
Jan 2015
#86
You seem to think the nation would revolt with 1 purpose in mind, but you haven't a purpose in mind
muriel_volestrangler
Jan 2015
#138
Russell Brand is wrong about this. The electoral system is what needs to be done away.
Tuesday Afternoon
Jan 2015
#4
yes, my bad. not enough room in the subjectline ... shorthand. but, yes, the ec.
Tuesday Afternoon
Jan 2015
#68
Good point, while I appreciate people like him making comments that might wake people
randys1
Jan 2015
#64
You wanted a discription of the world after. The rest of the world would move on. In the USA
jwirr
Jan 2015
#16
I think change will come but this way will not bring it about. Actually more involvement is what we
jwirr
Jan 2015
#46
Hey, 1SBM… Look at this for an alternative point on what humans might do...
MrMickeysMom
Jan 2015
#79
You are assuming that the revolution would be unsuccessful, thereby allowing Republicans
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#43
I do not think this will really happen but it could. Especially if we think that not voting is a way
jwirr
Jan 2015
#50
I apologize if I seem a bit dense. I don't follow celebrity culture too closely and thus I may have
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#54
Politics (and power) abhors a vacuum and will rush to fill it. Not voting is the
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#88
I agree. This is one of the issues that I have often gotten into trouble about here on DU because I
jwirr
Jan 2015
#103
Okay, since we cannot agree on what Russell Brand is saying I went outside DU and googled.
jwirr
Jan 2015
#117
From what I read. He has reasons for his philosophy but I just do not agree with him. GOTV.
jwirr
Jan 2015
#122
K & R, good post on the outcomes of not voting and allowing the GOP to rule.
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#44
Completely true. The Rs have been using abortion, gay rights, etc. to control the vote for years now
jwirr
Jan 2015
#53
And that thread was either started by a Rove plant or a liberal who hasnt thought things
randys1
Jan 2015
#71
Sorry- in a general strike, I get up and go to work just like I do every other day
NBachers
Jan 2015
#119
All due respect, but voters in '64 chose the peacenik LBJ, only to find
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#51
Maybe this was a posting by Karl Rove and gang. The GOP is trying every way possible to keep
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#47
people are always calling for revolution on the internet. but it doesn't mean anything
JI7
Jan 2015
#58
lol - beacuse, you know, a populist like FDR or Truman or Eisenhower or Kennedy
whereisjustice
Jan 2015
#67
I don't agree at all. I think we need to fix what's broken about the voting process. I thnk that
DesertDiamond
Jan 2015
#72
Other than one poster, who did a good job answering your question, nobody else has...
randys1
Jan 2015
#78
At least in short-run (couple of years), things would likely be worse for "revolters" and others.
Hoyt
Jan 2015
#92
I think not voting is daft, but I live in Oregon, Brand is British and can comment away on his own
Bluenorthwest
Jan 2015
#95
Russell Brand and his fellow armchair revolutionaries are some of the biggest tools on the
geek tragedy
Jan 2015
#97
He's a bullshit artist, there's nothing new about his brand of bullshit.
Major Hogwash
Jan 2015
#129
Let Russell Brand give away 100% of his wealth, with no prospect of making it back in big chunks.
Dreamer Tatum
Jan 2015
#120
How about the "mass revolt" of 100% voter turnout? Could we try that first?
McCamy Taylor
Jan 2015
#140