[simple mind]

What would have to happen until the treshhold is reached were People would not care anymore about the consequences of their actions.
Like taking away their Jobs, Houses, Credits, Entertainments,
make them feel unwanted, useless, removing/reducing Socialwelfare, abusing them with low wages or dirty Jobs.
I am asking because i am residing in a third World Country and here the Rulers realy Rule and the Population is at the mercy of the Powerfull/Rich.
The way it is handeled here is that Alcohol and Cigarettes are very cheap and available at every Streetcorner to anybody, you can find a group of drinking/drunk people anytime of the day.
Also the basic Foods are relatively cheap but have increased in the last 6 months, the average income in my location is about 200Peso or 4$ for daylabor.
The overall situation is still quiet and not much Crime is commited.
What you Guys think how that would look in the Western World with about 50% unenployment like here, officialy it is offcourse much less but the truth is that here almost every Family has sombody working abroad sending money home and the ones home don't work anymore.

[Antares]

Historically, as my history teacher so wittily puts it:

"For any revolution, even if you don't know what it's about, always try this: Angry farmers mad as hell (high taxes), and they ain't goin' to take it no more!"

Well, as a very sweeping statement, ancient or modern, whenever the going gets tough, it's usually high time revolutions break out. The following may be reasons:

- Economic difficulties. High taxes. High tariffs. Debts. Low profit.
- Suppression of Civil Rights
- Over conservatism in the government; sometimes you just gotta let the Zeitgeist flow
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

- Government is too radical; People deal with changes slowly.
- Anger against new ruler in conquered territories (although it may not apply to modern circumstances that much)
- Racial minorities who feel threatened
- When needs aren't being met. Famines, droughts, disasters

Take debt imprisonment for example. Throwing them in jail aren't going to solve anything; the prisoners have no way of paying the debt. Sometimes the government leaves their subjects with no choice. (No debts paid = prison; Prison = no debts paid)

[TheLastMohican]

For an individual, it is very simple: just a comparison between the inconvenience of the system and the risk involved in escaping from or destroying that system. Amateur criminals assess this incorrectly on a regular basis.

Things get very complicated when you are speaking of populations. People will have different opinions of the balance. This was clearly demonstrated during the American Revolution The loyalists were not arguing that the stamp act and other controversial measures were fair; they simply thought that conventional diplomatic methods were in order, rather than a military revolt. While the Declaration of Independence presented a fine bit of government-related philosophy that supported the cause, it took emotional appeals and magnified indignation to rile the masses and garner widespread support for a revolution. If each person had really calculated the risk, the revolution would have fizzled.

The French Revolution had a slightly different style, being based solely on public discontent and anger at extravagant nobles, and not being triggered by a specific new law or political blunder. It had been brewing for a long time, just waiting for some event to signal the beginning. Once the Bastille was stormed, it was practically over for the nobility, because although they had superior soldiers and weaponry, they were fighting against most of the population. Even though the Bastille was not any kind of militarily significant stronghold, the attack was more than enough to spur the rest of the peasants into action. All that was necessary was someone who was bold enough to make the first move.

Other rebellions, especially those in ancient times, had more to do with cutting one's losses by switching loyalties. This most notably happened to the Roman Empire (several times). When Hannibal's army had successes in Italy, many provinces gave their allegiance to Carthage, expecting that Hannibal would eventually take Rome. That kind of revolt started at the top, where provincial leaders were calculating their chances of political success and trying to side with the winner. In true Machiavellian fashion, the main goal is to avoid upsetting the public in the process, and allowing them to largely forget about the change in government, since they are not directly affected. Coups among already-notable political figures often take this form, with few people really caring about the result. The U.S. has this trading of power down to a science. It would be unheard of for half the population to declare sole loyalty to the Republican or Democratic candidate and then rebel on that candidate's behalf, for example.

[Santana28]

There was a quote somewhere.... about how we are only 3 lost meals away from the breakdown of civilization. When the people become truly hungry, we will start seeing big problems emerge.

The government has done a good job of distracting the young, angry males of military age. I'm not sure how much longer this can continue. Of course... if we keep importing foreign nationals to fill the military... and our soldiers returned home find there are no jobs for them to fill... it's only a matter of time
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[RichardCMongler]

	What would it take for the People to Revolt?

That's easy: a complete understanding of the monetary system.

[Functianalyst]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
:

	With the economic, natural disasters and constant threat of terrorism, is the US subject to facing a revolution? The 60's (both centuries) brought civil unrest. We have decades of economic instability (late 20's-early 30's and late 70's-early 80's), but has there been a time when they all combined?

This was during Katrina in seeing how the looters were storming the city. I guess there is a difference between revolt which could be semi organized and just complete chaos. The latter is scary.

[Karamazov]

As TLM aptly put it, the tumultuous winds of revolt are always fanned by the mass discontent with the existing order of things, as listed above. And along with most discontent, historically the dissatisfied tried to delineate their grievances through legitimate channels, mostly in a peaceful manner. Whenever the composite group of officials and other member of the ruling elite stonewall and protract any sort of concessions that could be made between the opposing groups; with former remaining indifferent of their circumstances, violence usually ensues.

The Russian Revolution that overthrew the presiding monarchy of Tsar Nicholas II, for example, could have been avoided If Nicholas had allowed for a cessation of his absolute power; continuing on the precedent established by Tsar Alexander II, who opted for a more representative method of governance.

Another facet endemic of so many revolutions, Is that in spite of the emotional appeals, solidarity, and idealism so ingrained in the consciousness of the people, when the smokescreen clears, the new order has often become an even more malevolent agency than the previous. Robespierre and the Reign of Terror; after all was said and done, the disaffected citizens stepped aside for the 1st French Restoration. The Algerian war of Independence; saw the collapse of several French Republics and an end to French colonialism, only to be greeted by the instability of the 90's.

[simple mind]

I also remember something about a certain kind of reserves every country is supposed to maintain, something with Grains/Food and Fuel/Energie, i don't know what it's called in English but i remember that some Industrialized Countries are down to only one months Supply.





simple mind added to this post, 15 minutes and 45 seconds later...

Originally Posted by Santana28 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The government has done a good job of distracting the young, angry males of military age. I'm not sure how much longer this can continue. Of course... if we keep importing foreign nationals to fill the military... and our soldiers returned home find there are no jobs for them to fill... it's only a matter of time To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

You made a good point in my opinion, this would take place in 2011 and what kind of Enemy would they have to fight then only God knows?!

[Marcus]

According to experience (at least where I live), revolutions start only when the ruling elite lessens its control. It's then when people start to expect more.

[zippikay]

simply hunger; when people are hungry, the most powerful ruler should be very wary-even towards his/her own most loyal servants

[thod]

When they turn off the TV transmitters and people get so bored sitting in their own little box that they begin to talk to their neighbor and realize that he is just like them.

[enWTFp]

The desire to make things right. Because they've realized how much they aren't.

The process reminds me of this song: Nine Inch Nails - Right Where It Belongs

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Of course, whatever is achieved from this, would be just another form of the same. Concepts do not matter, really, people just use them to reorganize the force.

That's why social affairs are such a waste of time - they are so similar. The biggest recent changes are in quantity, not in quality.

[Sleeper88]

And how do you keep people from revolting? You keep education levels low, you give them their basic needs like cheap food and cheap shelter and "two" political parties to choose from, so they feel like it's a democracy. Make them then believe they live in the greatest country of the world and you can do whatever you want with them. Even send them off to wars to commit heinous crimes against humanity, and pass it off as the good doers. Oh, did I mention playing the blame-game in the media? Always blaming something on someone else and finding a scapegoat helps people relief their anger at someone other than you.

[simple mind]

Originally Posted by Sleeper88 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

And how do you keep people from revolting? You keep education levels low, you give them their basic needs like cheap food and cheap shelter and "two" political parties to choose from, so they feel like it's a democracy. Make them then believe they live in the greatest country of the world and you can do whatever you want with them. Even send them off to wars to commit heinous crimes against humanity, and pass it off as the good doers. Oh, did I mention playing the blame-game in the media? Always blaming something on someone else and finding a scapegoat helps people relief their anger at someone other than you.

You must be talking about the Philippines where i am living for the last 9 years, but you forgot to mention the dayly Gameshows, the Raffels and Lotto/Numbergames, the Brain deathening TV/Radio Programs, Beauty Contests, Soap Operas, Movies, they use all the tricks to keep the Peoples Minds dizzy.

[Tishy]

I think it was two or three years ago now... we had a race riot.

I was excited! Maybe change will come and people will stop being complacent sheep!

It died down. People forgot and went back to how it was before. Complete waste of the blood and passion.

[OrrDavey]

I think it will happen when you give people so many welfare benefits that they really start to believe they deserve just as much as everyone else without doing any work. Then, when they see that they only have a modern house filled with reasonably luxurious items, they will bitch and complain that other people who work harder than them actually have more.

They will riot the streets like crazed maniacs demanding equal treatment.

[rahdam]

Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile?

Your post has a very interesting twist to it. They will demand "equal treatment" because they have been given "more equal" treatment first and will want to see how far they can push it. And who is responsible for putting the idea of "equal treatment" in their head? Does the idea originate with them, or with those in power who will be the target of the rebellion?

[blueback]

I don't think people in the US are anywhere near revolt. For the most part we aren't organized for one. A revolt would require that the necessities of life still be provided, but America is too interconnected. All our food is produced on mega-farms and transported in trucks and trains. Too many people live too far away from their source of food.

[OrrDavey]

	And who is responsible for putting the idea of "equal treatment" in their head? Does the idea originate with them, or with those in power who will be the target of the rebellion?

Equal treatment is not bad. To me it means that everyone is, largely, playing by the same set of rules as everyone else. I think this is what it meant to a lot of people in the past, too. Now this is changing so "equal treatment" is starting to be quantified by monetary equality. This is just crazy to me. Some people work harder and/or choose a field that adds more value than other people. They deserve more money because of it. This isn't some crazy, super conservative idea.

What do I think spurred this? It wasn't any individual or group. There is just the opportunity now.

There is enough output now so that people can leech off of others while society still prospers. If you look back 100 years, people really had to work hard to even put food on the table. Now food is on everyone's table for free - people are able to survive without working.

I don't think any one party can be blamed for this, either. People just stopped looking at the big picture - people now think that money grows on trees.

[blueback]

	Originally Posted by OrrDavey To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	people now think that money grows on trees.

That would explain why no one has a problem with cutting them all down.

[MaleVolentworld]

What would make us revolt?

If the government banned all clothing so we had to walk around naked and see other naked people, this would create humiliation and also jubilation so it is not enough.

In addition, it must ban all languages and make us talk in numbers.

I think that would be enough for me to revolt, and also be revolted (not because I work part time for the government and part time for private industry, so that I'd revolt on Tuesdays and be revolted on Thursdays, are you nuts or something?)