Violent revolution

We don't always get to pick and choose what authority we are placed under. I didn't pick my parents, nor did I have any say in the school district I was in. I think it's a fundamental right to be able to express an opinion, to state a dislike for rules and policies in place - but the rebel who rebels for the sake of rebelling is just a little... off.

Is it too much to ask for a valid reason why a rule or law needs to be cast aside, besides that it's there...?

Also, not sure who I'm talking to - maybe I'm just tossing stuff out.

I assume you were taught spelling at one point or another. That would imply that when you spelled something wrong, a teacher told you so and corrected you. Since you abandoned your own spellings, you accepted what that authority thrust upon you.

Most rules and laws are good. Some are stupid and make no sense and hurt people more than they help society those laws need to be either wiped from the books remade so that they work for the betterment of society.

Your rhetoric won't work on me please come back when you and debate me with logic and not fallacies and analogies.

edited 27th Jan '11 5:44:56 PM by americanbadass

Without debating specifics, yes. I can agree with that mindset. If it works, great. If it doesn't, discuss and reach a resolution of some sort.

You say you reject any rules you don't like, but the simple fact is that no one can function, or even learn to function, in human society without at some point being made to do things they dislike/disagree with. Your claims that you'll never let anyone make you do something are absurd.

edited 27th Jan '11 5:47:45 PM by Wanderhome

Make me do something, I don't want to do.

<General rant about the internet>

Seriously, I'm getting tired of people using the fact that I don't spell things out as a reason to discredit my arguments.

Do I really need to spell it out for you, commonsense should dictate these things but on the internet apparently I have to spell it out. Seriously if you on tv tropes you should be smart enough to apply common sense to discussion without the other party pointing it out in every statement they make.

I'm laconic, my statements are brief, blunt and to the point and if you don feel like apply the common sense necessary to understand it I shouldn't have to explain it to you.

Even more so when I stated it in a previous post.

edited 27th Jan '11 7:01:30 PM by americanbadass

"Only I need to be bothered understanding my arguments, you should just accept them because I say so and it's 'common sense'." Nope, sorry, try again. Anyway, you're really in the wrong thread now and more diversions of this nature will be thumped. See how easy it is for me to force rules on you?

EDIT: Hell with it.

edited 27th Jan '11 5:56:30 PM by Wanderhome

I dislike it as much as the next person does. If it's not trampling all over my human rights, though, I just roll my eyes and put up with it. I *should* be permitted to cross a solid white line on the freeway if I've checked my blindspot for hazards, but it's a traffic infraction that you'll get pulled over and cited for here. Oh well.

Huh, I disagree with you so you thump me with you mod powers. So, was I right to assume you are for Authoritarianism?

Please don't thump me for that It be all the proof I need,If you are authorization I have no problem with that after all this is a ''free' country everyone is entitled to their opinions and that's why I'm generally against the idea of a violent revolution, because discussions of this matter are allowed and generally encouraged.

Also your not making me obey any rules your just blocking what I said when you thump me, my stance on that rule hasn't changed nor are you forcing me to obey it. I'm not trying to start a new argument here just pointing something out.

edited 27th Jan '11 6:28:33 PM by americanbadass

I'd wager that third world armies have better experience with insurgency than the Americans do. Now if you want to say the Americans have the best experience with such thing among the West, then yeah, you'd be right.

going back to the OP after reading over the stuff.

Yes a Violent revolution is sometimes the viable answer. But that is highly dependent on the situation. A peaceful answer is of course preferable just don't rely on that as your only option.

As was noted a multi-faceted approach is best if your peaceful plans go down the crapper be prepared to fight if necessary.

Any revolution that relies on tech to give it large boost is shooting it self in the foot. The ability to target those assets and exploit them is shocking.

Why do people think its so bad?

Do innocents really have to die because you dont like paying taxes?

That just blows my mind.

Reasonable taxes, no. Taxing people and businesses until no one has money to pay for necessities, maybe.

It depends on how draconian the laws get.

^^ EDIT: Yes, look at the internet restrictions showing up in Egypt now.

edited 27th Jan '11 8:49:13 PM by pvtnum11

I don't know anybody who wants to kill people to lower their taxes. I'm sure they exist, but I can't speak for them.

I do know have heard of people who believe factions within the government are deliberately spending the US into oblivion in hopes of causing the country to collapse.

edited 27th Jan '11 8:49:32 PM by FrodoGoofballCoTV

Just get well prepared to take full advantage of the collapse then?

You know, there was this one (admittedly rather obscure) war that took place in the late Eighteenth Century in North America that was actually sparked by resentment over taxation...

edited 27th Jan '11 8:50:30 PM by Wanderhome

That would be the more intelligent strategy, and I've heard of people doing that too.

also the idea that government can completely ignore the opinion of an entire region.

edited 27th Jan '11 8:51:35 PM by FrodoGoofballCoTV

Like, not living in a big city. I'd think that city life will get totally nasty if a collapse of government happens. Like, once the water, power and sewage utilities go away.

Yeah, I sort of worry about that. My city isn't huge, but we're very close to LA.

Thankfully my base is sort of out in the countryside and it's in a really defendable spot, if the US Government collapsed I'd probably just hole up with the rest of my Guard unit, horde resources until the initial chaos faded, and then try to set up a small system of Government in our local 500k city. We've got solar panels and some weird machines in Civil Engineering that make purified water en masse out of condensation, as well as tons of food, ammo, generators, and vehicles.

No Armor though, that's depressing. Not even up-armored humvees, though the navy base nearby has tons of MRAPS.

We'll call it... The New California Republic.

edited 27th Jan '11 8:53:08 PM by Barkey

Screw that. Brotherhood of Steel, all the way. ;)

Nah, I don't do religious babble.

Besides, no power armor or energy weapons around.

Give it a few years. And really, although Word of God calls the Bo S religious all the time, none of the in-game stuff ever gave me a religious vibe.

Only if you guys aren't insufferable arrogant elitists.

...

...

...think I'll move back to Oregon and watch over Cyclops. Not far from my home town.

^^

My group wouldn't really treat technology with reverence and try to hoard it, we'd be more concerned with expanding our resources and territory, and trying to uphold law, order, and staying organized as much as possible.

The change I'd make though is instead of a regular democracy, we'd go the Starship Troopers route. So long as we stayed true to those principles, we wouldn't see an armed revolt ever again.

edited 27th Jan '11 8:59:46 PM by Barkey