Revolution...man!

iNVESTIGATE said:

SATYAGRAHA!

Click to expand...

Thats where its at!

And laws don't work, the more laws you have, the more people that are in jail, the more you have admitted that the social structure has failed, meaning people don't have faith in the morals so you must convince or compromise.

Satyghara is basically an open egalitarian society, if they take your house, you squat there once they left. If they turn off your water or power, turn it back on. Granted this is much more difficult now a days, but if you have enough not participating, or covertly not participating by infiltrating infrastructure, some hackers have the ability to do this as well as white collar professionals. It could be done, free everyone!

Peace

Satyaghara is not really a society, it is a philosophy for non-violent, compassion resistance. I doubt that western culture could apply satyaghara, and stay true to it. For one thing, Satyaghara holds nobody liable. You convert, not defeat your opponent. Ever hear of the law of suffering? This is one of the components of Satyaghara. Are you saying that people should resign to endure all of the suffering they can, in hopes that the powers that be will one day realize that what they are doing is wrong, and voluntarily change their ways for the good?

Under Satyaghara, if they take your house and you squat there when they leave, or you turn your power back on after they turn it off, then what your protest creates is a new system based on the re-theft of things that were taken from you. You would not be sufficiently oppressed for the opposition to develop a conscience about what they are doing to you. The means does not justify the end, the means IS the end. If you solve problems by creating laws, then what you create is a police state. If you solve problems by giving money to the needy, then you create a welfare state.

I read a book once called The Great Wave by David Hackett Fischer. The book revisits economic ups and downs through history, and the impact that those ups and downs have had on societies through the ages. As populations grow and resources diminish, economies have a way of reducing populations through social unrest. People that wish to participate in riot and violent revolution against the government will surely die. Once enough people die so that the resources can support the population again, everyone that is left will share that wealth. It has been proven over and over again. Through his faithful suffering, the Satyaghara practitioner will prevail.

As the FED keeps interest rates low to artificially keep the dollar solvent, the economic wave will grow and grow. The bigger that wave is when it hits landfall, the more people will be washed out, and fewer people will be left. Fewer people? More resources to go around. I think that 'They' are in a mode to try to maximize the damage for when the inevitable happens.

ink the world said:

Hunting Rifle < Abrams tank

Good luck w/ your revolution

Click to expand...

There are enough of us vets to counter our military. If it came down to armored vehicles our casualties would be higher, but they don't seal our fate. We would be forced to teach regular civilians improvised explosives.

I think if enough of the house and senate were systematically removed, things would change quickly. The question is, are there enough true patriots to make it happen..

http://www.democracynow.org/2006/9/8/satyagraha_100_years_later_gandhi_launches

While there are a lot of basic principles within the Satyagrahic philosophy; there remains three that always stick with me.. in two close-by categories..

1. Non-violence.
2. Truth.
3. Non-stealing.

& There's also the Satyagrahi's principles in regards to action's or large-scale campaign's..

1. Harbour No Anger.
2. Suffer The Anger Of The Opponent.
3. Never Retaliate to Assaults or Punishment; But Do Not Submit, Out of Fear of Punishment or Assault, to an Order Given in Anger.

Sounds like??

i didn't know we were playing charades.

Kind of inane and arbitrarily inaccurate if i do say so myself. Your comparison of Martyrdom to Satyagraha that is.


Considering that martyr's would much rather have themselve's and their follower's die than renounce their religious belief's. And would go as far as to strap bomb's to them and unquestioning children and proceed to destroy opposing sect's (not the very best way of progressing and instrumentally helping and saving people).

Where as, in Satyagraha, the philosophy opposes [in structure and core] killing people to make a point.


But, through patience and the will to not be a dick to anyone you help the opposition by showing them that murdering, raping, pillaging, and any other kind of fucking horrible action in name of 'your coutry' is in point and fact WRONG.


Gandhi has also been known to condone violence if the case did so call for it. But, not until it was absolutely necessary.

''I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence....I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonour....But I believe that nonviolence is infinitely superior to violence, forgiveness is more manly than punishment''