As someone who does OK, but lives in reality (not the bay area), I feel a revolution coming. I hope it's not a violent one, but who knows at this point. Hopefully it's just a politician with big policy changes.
People feel completely disenfranchised. You keep hanging housing over their head but just out of reach like some baby toy, then inflation spikes everything else. What's the point of working even?
I don't know the solution, but I don't have a good feeling about the next 10 years.
Culturally, the average person here in India is absolutely clueless about what freedom is. The idea of small government is non-existent in the minds of people.
Based on hundreds of conversations with my red state friends, attitudes are very different. You may be right, but the comparison is missing many key details.
People who are obese enough to not take take stairs but elevators cant fight revolutions by definition.
That is why they have elections, and one way or other democracy fixes most of these problems. Even if the fix is not perfect, or entirely acceptable to everyone.
Revolutions are just totally a different thing altogether and you need way more than milk and egg prices going up, or your favorite politician not getting elected to happen.
Workers in India have it rough, the concept of releasing letters[0] is quite offensive to my western ear. You give me permission to leave?
With H1B it's not much better in the US, lets say your job is taking advantage of you, working you 80 hour weeks, one day you decide that you want to go to your daughters big soccer game and they fire you for it. Find a new job in 30 days (?) or move out of the country. Children in the workhouses during industrial revolution had more mobility. Absolutely bonkers. Clearly designed to be explotative.
My Indian peers have been as good as my western ones on average. I understand the motivations, but you guys really don't have to put up with this. If anyone should revolt it's them.
Watch Ray Dalio's videos on the long term debt cycle and how the economy works in general. Another interesting topic is what is called the "fourth turning" which sort of says that major changes happen around once a human lifecycle. We are going to have some major economic changes in the next decade, but no one knows how that will look. I think it's 50/50 whether it's violent or not.
I read the fourth turning book. I couldn't finish it just because how tenuous the argument was. It was also debunked by experts. I find it absolutely not interesting at all.
What is far more interesting is people seeing through the bullshit. Large parts of our lives have been bureaucratized and oozes with an arrogant and paternalistic ideology that tells us how much we’re worth as if it was a law of nature.
Workers find solidarity, meaning and community among peers and realize that we have real power and can have a say in our lives.
I expect this to grow and I hope it creates a counterbalance to centralized power structures that are quite frankly often severely detached from reality.
You are being overly dramatic. A hundred years ago, workers were treated so bad and had such bad living conditions it makes you sick just to hear about it. THAT lead to some violent revolutions in some countries, most of them young, undemocratic, or unstable. Some of them migrated 2,000 km from their home.
its not only about food, shelter and entertainment, its about perspective. if you have to slave away for another 40 years, living paycheck to paycheck, can barely afford a family, a revolution in whatever form it comes might sound good. Check out the Strike at Kellogs, 80h/week, 16h Shifts for barely any money and the Company just wants to fire the striking employees. You can only press so much productivity out of people until they push back and i think we can see that this pushback is starting...
Yeah this is the reality disconnect, if you call modern work slaving away you're probably not the kind of person that's going to join a violent revolt, it's easy to write that shit on forums.
I don't think the conditions are close to a large scale revolution in the U.S., especially if you mean a violent revolution. First, there is not a high level of discord in society. Upheavals in the 70s were much more significant than those now. Second, most people blame one or the other political party for our problems, rather than the established order generally, making it more likely people will fight within the bounds of the existing political system.
> making it more likely people will fight within the bounds of the existing political system.
You are aware there was a violent disruption to the peaceful transfer of power last year, right? Since then, predicated on lies, partisans have changed the system to give political parties full control of election results; and the January 6th Committee has essentially uncovered and extensive coup plot that spans the White House, DOJ, and DoD.
We are so far outside of the bounds of the system as we know it that it’s scary people don’t recognize it yet.
EDIT: I'm going to expand upon this because of the dead comment to me, which calls Jan 6 a "riot". It's clear that there is an effort afoot to minimize the events of Jan 6. This needs to end asap because of what the Jan 6 Committee is uncovering.
Jan 6 was not a riot, it was the last stage of a coup plot that started at least the day of the election, before the final results had even been tallied. It's detailed most clearly in the Eastman Memo, authored by John Eastman [0]. The coup plot spanned the White House, Department of Defense, Department of Justice, state legislatures, various members of Congress and the Senate, various lawyers, and of course various paramilitary groups.
The plan was:
1) Pence must declare Arizona invalid when counting certificates of the vote. Specifically Arizona because of the closest states, it comes first alphabetically, and so is counted the soonest.
2) Democrats object, so the matter is taken to the House
3) Voting is done by State Delegation according to the Constitution. Republicans control a majority of delegations, so they would vote in Trump, thus ending democracy in America.
The problem with this plan was that there was no reason to reject any certificate. There was no fraud on the scale Trump claimed. So they tried to litigate, but that failed because they couldn't prove their allegations. Then they tried to strong-arm state election officials by threatening them with jailtime if they didn't manufacture fraudulent votes. That failed as well. They also tried to convince friendly Republican state legislatures to send an alternate slate of electors. That failed as well. They even went so far as to put pressure on state elections boards and county elections officials. This came in the form of threats and intimidation. Trump put pressure on AG Bill Barr to declare the results suspicious but Barr did the opposite, claimed there was no proof of fraud, and he quit because he was smart enough to realize what was going on.
All of this failed because people were just doing their job of running elections in an apolitical matter.
After those efforts, Pence was still wavering on whether to declare Arizona invalid. He needed more pretext so Trump leaned on the Justice department. No one there would open the demanded pretextual investigation except Jeffrey Clark , who was several rungs down the order of succession for acting AG after Barr left. Trump wanted to make him acting AG to open the investigation, but essentially every senior member of the DOJ threatened to quit if he did that, thus ruining the pretext of the investigation, so that failed.
So how do you execute the Eastman memo without Pence? Disrupt the proceedings. The Jan 6. counting of electoral votes is the last stop in the Presidential selection process. If you delay that, you're in extraconstitutional territory. Think of it like a buffer overflow. You're in undefined space where the rules are made by those in power. And guess who had power at the time?
Thus the plan became to hold the Capitol as long as possible in the event that Pence failed to do what Trump wanted. The plan was to generate a great crowd at the ellipse, whip them to a frenzy, point them at the capitol, and if Pence certified Arizona, to then call him out on twitter. Within the crowd they threaded several paramilitary groups including the Prod Boys, Oath Keepers, and 3%ers. While the vast majority of people were not there with any specific goal, there were groups there with the premeditated intent of breaching and occupying the Capitol. But to penetrate all of the security, they needed a mob. You can see these paramilitary groups slithering through the riot crowd like a snake through water in many of the videos from that day. They move in formation and came prepared with uniforms and equipment. Their goal was not to kill anyone, but it was to occupy the capitol for as long as possible. That's why they didn't come with an arsenal, because they knew as soon as the guns come out on one side, they come out on the other side.
To hold the Capitol for as long as possible, they would have to delay the National Guard from showing up. Thus, right after the election when Sec. Esper refused to call the election fraudulent, he was fired and replaced (essentially) with a Trump loyalist Kash Patel. That's why you keep hearing the phrase 187 minutes from the Jan 6 Committee. Because for 3 hours almost, Kash Patel did nothing as far as sending the National Guard, and he did nothing because he was ordered to do nothing (or as it may be more likely, wasn't ordered to do anything, despite urgent need, a dereliction of duty).
Why? What were they trying to do during this time. Well:
1) they were seeing how bad it was going to get. The worse it gets, the better a justification for extraordinary uses of power.
2) They were continuing to lean on state legislatures during this time to send alternate slates of electors. Giuliani and Sen. Mo Brooks were texting at the time, with Rudy telling him to stall as long as possible.
3) They were waiting for Pence to evacuate the building, but he refused.
Ultimately this part of the plan failed because of sheer luck. If any hostages were taken, it probably would have worked. This is why many want Officer Goodman as Time person of the year, because he singlehandedly goaded the mob away from the Senate chambers where he knew many members were hiding.
--
Now take a step back. What have I just described? I've detailed the efforts of a sitting President to use his powers as President to fraudulently remain in power despite an opponent being duly elected under the system in place. That's a literal autocoup. That's not a mere riot. That's how democracies die. If that plan had worked, that's the end of Constitutional order in America.
So how does this plan work in the future? Well:
1) make voting harder. Georgia flipped blue this year because there was surge of minority support in a few key counties by just enough votes. Make voting harder in just those counties, and next time maybe it won't flip by just enough votes. These efforts have been passed into law.
2) Spread FUD about voting. This justifies unbounded skepticism of any election result, no matter how above board. This has been going on for a year and now a large portion of our country believe there was fraud in the 2020 election.
3) Take partisan control of state elections. A lot of the above could have been avoided if Georgia had just "found" missing votes like Trump had asked in the first place. Or if Barr had concluded there was basis for an investigation. Or if state legislatures had just "decided" to send electors they preferred as opposed to ones the voters preferred. For example, Fulton County, which saw no fraud and which has been under non-partisan control forever, is now under partisan Republican control by people who are very sure there was fraud in the 2020 election, even though they can't identify any in Fulton County. But they are there to make sure there is never any fraud again. Which we all need to take to mean that they are there to make sure that a Democrat never wins Georgia again in a close decision. There's no other way to interpret this effort.
Now you can call any results fraudulent, send any electors you want to the counting of the certificates, and leave it up to the Supreme Court to decide. Fingers crossed!
The above information is not from "media" but from official government proceedings of the bipartisan Jan 6 Committee. I suppose when your elected leaders tell you that the previous government tried to overthrow the current government, one response is to go camping. You do you.
But in the end there is actual physical evidence in front of us. We all have a choice to accept it, or to sweep it under the rug. To deny what it is telling us. To equivocate and prevaricate. To whatabout or to even outright lie to ourselves.
But the actual physical evidence is pointing to a large autocratic force in our government that intends to take away your vote, in favor of Russian-style one-party rule. It already tried once, and it continues unabated today.
Say what you want about the America electoral system, and by God there's a lot to say about it, but at the end of the day there was a transfer of power last year because the old government lost the election fair and square. Elections do matter. Voting does matter. So if you appreciate your right to vote, don't look away. Go on your camping trip, but when you get back, take a long hard look at the evidence presented by the Jan 6th Committee.
This year, the price of the type of place I want to buy rose so fast, that the downpayment increased by more than what I could save this year. I'm top 30% income bracket and save more then a third of my net.
You may already be a listener, but I've found great joy in listening to Mike Duncan's Revolutions[1]. It makes it easier to pick out what structures, people, and events today might make their way into history books(or podcasts of the future) one hundred years from now should things go pear-shaped.
There are many points to be made, but one that tends to go less appreciated is that in the period leading up to the dramatic revolutionary events there isn't a constant increase in tension. There are flare ups of course, but they punctuate years of relative peace. Just because tensions die down for a bit does not mean things are getting fixed. Quite the opposite, it lulls people into complacency. That is, until the systemic deficiencies paired with personalities unable to address them collide and everything falls apart.
Past Performance Is Not Indicative Of Future Results. You see many of the same trends in history, yes, but also many surprises. History repeats itself, the second time as farce.
I wonder how much time we have left for a real citizen revolution. Is is not difficult to imagine a near future with an automated and mechanized military and police with equipment that cannot go rogue. People in the US like to talk about guns as protections against state tyranny but not many have automated laser point defence for drone attacks.
I miss the days when people were better educated in civics.
You are right, people talk about guns as protection against state tyrany, but they forget that the reason it works as protection against the state is because the person bringing violence against the state is willing to become a martyr.
The more the state pays in blood, the more it looses it legitimacy.
Tyranny doesn’t happen by force. Tyranny doesn’t look like a burglar breaking into your house, and defeating tyranny doesn’t look like you gunning them down.
Tyranny is invited. It happens when you willingly open the door to someone who says they are going to solve all your problems, yet they never do.
They will always blame someone else when the problems aren’t solved, and you will believe them because you believed them once before. You won’t even recognize this as tyranny because you will be so outraged at the people the tyrant tells you are to blame for your problems. Slowly these people disappear, yet the problems remain.
Until one day the tyrant blames you for the problems of the world. And suddenly you recognize the tyranny for what it is. You reach for your gun but it does you no good. At this point the tyrant has turned everyone against you, just as he had turned you against others.
The process continues until there’s no one left to blame, and the tyrant at this point usually ends up hanging from a tree, or hiding in a hole in the ground.
But at no point in this process is a gun useful for preventing tyranny, unless you’re willing to actually be a martyr and kill the tyrant before anyone recognizes him as such. You’ll be labeled a murderer and sentenced to life in prison, but you will have prevented tyranny.
> People in the US like to talk about guns as protections against state tyranny
They do, but you can ignore it -- it's mostly lies and bluster. If they insist, ask them the last time they participated in (or even saw) an uprising due to government theft by civil asset forfeiture.
Another reminder: food was far more expensive then, they had food shortages, and a significant portion of the population could barely afford to eat. It is certainly not worse right now.
Not to dismiss your point -- because it maybe true -- but don't Americans say this like pretty much all the time? Between survivalists to qAnon supporters it's always about revolution in the country. I'm not saying you are part of any of those, but it seems to me that in reality people in the US just adapt and life goes on...
I don't know, if you hang out in certain parts of the internet, it feels like a revolution is coming, but it reality Bernie still can't win the primaries, so I don't think the numbers are actually there. But I also won't be surprised if the next generation of voters is more socialist-leaning.
I don't know much about the actual reality in the US outside of what we see on the net, but I feel the revolution you are talking about would come from outside of traditional voting circus.
It don't mean it would bypass election in all cases, but I'd expect a completely different mechanism interfering with who gets to power, instead of the usual "let's min-max campaigns based on declared party allegiance like we did for decades now"
The revolution will not come from the left. The "left" elites have forgotten the people, and the left in general is talking more about identity issues than class issues.
The revolution will be more Trump than Bernie. Like in the early 1900, where more revolutions where fascist than communist.
What does being a multi millionaire allow one to do? An old couple with a few million saved up for the rest of their life is protected against health risks and some inflation, but they are not likely going to be able to spend sufficiently to influence others.
>annual income of 1,100,000 U.S. dollars for a household of 2 is equivalent to $1,309/day per person in 2011 in purchasing power parity dollars, putting you in the high income group worldwide, along with 39.8% of people in advanced economies.
Sanders does not have recurring annual income of $1M+. It was for a couple years due to selling a book at the height of his popularity. Having $1M+ in reliable, recurring income would allow a “multi millionaire” to have influence.
Certainly his position as US Senator and accompanying benefits is significant, but I was just commenting that being a “multi millionaire” is not indicative of much sway assuming multi millionaire also means having a few million in total net worth at retirement age.
Anyway, my point is, I would not qualify him as “elite” in the sense of being able to affect federal policy just by his regular income / net worth if he was not already a US senator. He would get outbid by many others with deeper pockets vying for political influence.
He doesn't quite have a million dollar income. He made a million dollars from selling a book, which is a one-off. His normal annual income is more like 250 000$, which is still a lot.
I came to the same conclusion. However my thinking was more along the lines of examining where the most evocative, incisive, accurate, renderings of culture & critique were being created. I'll tell you, the revolution will not be televised. And it's not coming from America's liberals (and of course not from the Silent gen. type conservatives either.) but it is more often than not coming from the right. Thought not the right that is in power now...
What people in the US call left elites, is being called slightly rightwing in the EU. When I hear comments like „state-funded housing is socialism“ I have to chuckle. That’s just how you make sure people won’t starve if they don’t resort to shady business.
Bernie‘s ideas would be called leftist here, but not extremely so.
The EU have tried to introduce it a bunch of times. Normally it got fought back by the UK, who are no longer in the EU. I could definitely see this happening in the next five to ten years.
As sibling poster mentioned, financial transaction taxes are being openly discussed in the EU. I haven't heard anyone call them socialist at least. Politicians in the US seem to use communism/socialism as a strawman to attack anything that would harm their puppeteers' wallets.
It's hard to debunk this since if we declare all democrat party to be "left", then yes, some democrats will be slightly rightwing. But there are definitely some "left" currents that started in US universities and are spreading to the rest of the world. The kind of stuff that Jordan Peterson is preaching against is definitely not considered "slightly rightwing" in the EU.
Antisemitism is on the rise to. Before comments were removed, the recent movie Santa Inc had tens of thousands of comments abut elves. It's full on Gab, and even on Twitter from the left.
I'm sure there were some bad comments, but IMO this is a marketing ploy. Remember Ghostbusters 2016? The film-makers made a huge deal about the trailer being downvoted heavily, claiming it was all about sexism. When in reality the trailer and the movie were pretty mediocre. Seems like the same thing with Santa Inc. Have you watched the trailer? It looks terrible.
The only oncoming revolution is the status quo. The Democrats aren't going to pass any voting rights legislation while they have the chance, and are going to allow the GOP to enshrine minority rule for the foreseeable future starting in 2022. A minority of the voting electorate is perfectly fine with this, and are situated such that their votes matter more than the majority to let this happen. There's a reason why the rightwing in the USA have embraced Putin and Eastern European soft dictators within the last 10 years, as it allows for massive government/friends of government grifting and minority suppression as a governing platform with public support.
Yeah, on that violent revolution thing. I've been thinking about it alot for the last few years, and then it dawned on me.
6 Jan 2021.
The violent revolution will always need a leader. In a democracy, that leader will establish some level of political success. These statements derive directly from the definitions.
So what we need to be on the lookout for is a political leader who normalizes mobs and violence, and quasi-political groups/associations which further encourage it.
Jan 6 2021
Proud Boys
QAnon
If you forgive the Goodwin, the example is developments originating in Germany prior to WWII.
See for example Kristallnacht, Nov 1938, Vienna, Austria, and the "spontaneous" mobs responsible for large amounts of the violence
Yes and many state houses were attacked on Jan 6 the weeks leading up to that, people closed a state legislature. Combine those and public schools with rising violence at private-sector workplaces (YouTube, VTA, clerks shot dead over masks)
The revolution is here in the form of workplace violence. Big employers are actually afraid to comment for fear of looking biased against the GOP
Jan 6th could have been so much worse if the President had merely asked, that's how close we got. The pieces were in place and one word, perhaps "go" or "now", would have been enough to cause substantially more injuries and deaths.
It was represented by Donald Trump, the rise of the right in Europe and the alignment of Russia and China for short term push back on the west.
DT would never have been elected if _any_ of the architects of the GFC had gone to jail. Imho that was Obama’s biggest mistake. Bailouts could be justifiable and understood by the population, no one going to jail was a betrayal.
It caused a tipping point in the erosion of trust in the established political class and in the American democracy.
The vitriol directed against Hilary was a symptom of that distrust
Yup, and the worse part? Nothing changed. Trump didn't didn't do a single fucking thing of material value to ameliorate the positions of those who voted for him, or the middle class for that matter. And yet he's almost sure to win again in 2024.
I think in an astonishingly short amount of time, people in the West forgot what revolution is.
He hasn't declared yet, but that's mainly only because being a declared candidate would put restrictions on how he can fundraise and what he can spend those funds on. He'll either run, or he'll anoint a successor and guarantee them a primary win.
I feel the same way. I hope I'm wrong, but my prediction is that we will have another civil war in the US within the next 10 years. We cannot continue our current cancel culture and political hatred indefinitely. It will come to a head and people will start killing each other. Again, I hope I'm wrong, but unless we get off our current trajectory, I fear I'm not.
I sincerely hope this comment ages more poorly than any comment ever made.
People feel completely disenfranchised. You keep hanging housing over their head but just out of reach like some baby toy, then inflation spikes everything else. What's the point of working even?
I don't know the solution, but I don't have a good feeling about the next 10 years.