1. An overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.
2. Sociology a radical and pervasive change in society and the social structure, especially one made suddenly and often accompanied by violence.
The question I would like to address here is this: can we the people foment a non-violent revolution that will bring about much needed radical and pervasive change in our social, economic and political structure?
In my first entry, I have outlined seven areas of focus for this blog and the list does not include revolution. Intrinsic to the list, however, is the notion that investigation into and critical thinking about these seven disciplines, by a small minority of folks, will set the stage for profound change in our society. Some posit that even as few as 5% of the population can influence direction and tip the balance toward profound change. My hope is that we can think our way toward action oriented strategies and avoid the chaos, destruction and bloodshed that could occur as the culmination of our present folly.
My premise is this: we are living under an oligarchy made up of large corporations (food production chain, pharma, chemical, energy, etc.), a web of financial entities (Goldman Sachs and the like), mega-banks (JP Morgan, etc.) and last but not least, Central Banks (our own dear Federal Reserve and its cousins all over the world). In this construction of the way things are, it really doesn’t matter much whether a Democrat or Republican is in power. It does matter a lot that we can be distracted by the discord between them, but ultimately they are there to do the will of the Oligarchy.
For instance, Obama is finally starting to make some noise about the obscene disparities in wealth distribution, but his own Attorney General, chief law enforcement officer of the land, has declared in testimony before congress that he will not prosecute known crimes by “Banksters” (not his term) since it would hurt the world economy. Republicans are more forthright in their support of the wealthy, wrapping themselves in the flag of free enterprise, but for all practical purposes there is very little difference in what would have happened under McCain/Romney or Obama. The maverick McCain was already “tamed” during the time leading up to the election of 2008 and Romney… well let’s just say that Romney was drinking (swimming in?)the cool aid and seemingly had no idea he was running to be the stooge, not President.
So, if your response to what is going on is to rant against Republicans for propagating wealth distribution upwards (with trickle down to create more minimum wage jobs), or against Democrats for propagating wealth downwards (you know, Socialism, ugh), then you are falling into a trap (for sure I am guilty of doing this at times) designed by the Oligarchy to keep us docile. Ferociously docile, but docile for all intents and purposes. I implore you to take the time to get the facts and apply critical thinking. Go back in history and look at the roots of money and banking.
If you are looking for a short cut, just go back 100 years to the formation of the Federal Reserve and come forward through the myriad attempts to curb the excessive power granted this a private bank, and the Oligarchy’s responses often cloaked in “reform” legislation. Take a stop along the way to study the confiscation of Gold (by Democrat FDR) at one price and setting the price six months later at a level 75% higher, and the Securities Laws of the early 30’s, and Bretton Woods (1944) elevating the dollar to reserve currency status, and Nixon taking us off Gold and establishing Petrodollars, and the final bringing down of the walls separating banking, finance and insurance (signed into law by President Clinton). If you’re really keen, take a look at the efforts to control the world order with patent law using the World Trade Organization as the war horse.
If you accept the premise that we are no longer a free society with a democratic form of government, then we can turn to the question of revolution and address the issue of violence. My second premise is that an organized violent revolution will not occur and even if it did, would be crushed with impunity under the freedom flag of our sacred constitution. It will not occur because the gun rights folks have been captured by the Oligarchy and will go down shooting in defense of property rights, defending their one acre against “socialists,” while the corporations with 10,000 acres smile benevolently from their bunkers. Even if it did occur, the razor wire enclosures to squelch the revolution have already been built and ammunition has already been bought up. And military coups, not part of our lexicon, would be preempted by the Oligarchy.
This is not to say that there will not be violence. It is simply to say that I do not see much hope in relying upon a violent uprising to replace the present order with anything revolutionary. If it is attempted, it will be squelched. If it were to “succeed” against all odds, the subsequent societal structures would be shaped by the very powers that we are subject to now. I posit that centralized mega movements are subject to manipulation. I suggest therefore that we look for grass roots actions that can shape the future organically and be spread biologically from cell to cell, without a manifesto and without violence. Impossible you say? Perhaps you are right. But can we try?
I put forward a term to describe an old way of doing business. An old way based on credit instead of debt, innovation in the commons instead of patent controls, well being instead of consumerism, intrinsic value instead of paper derivatives, respect for our world instead of exploitation of commodities, and acceptance of the other instead of religious fundamentalism. (I borrow this term, Fusion Enterprise, from David Martin (invertedalchemy.blogspot.com) and encourage you to read his blog.) It is out of this mix that I have coined the phrase Visualizing Intrinsic Value Alignment (VIVA).
My attempt to visualize a world made up of Fusion Enterprises will flow through a continued discussion of the seven topics outlined more than a year ago. I welcome your thoughts. I only ask you to set aside the rancor of debates pitting Liberal Socialist against Conservative Reactionaries. If that is where you want to go with this, you are totally missing the point. Take it elsewhere, I beg you. You can argue that a violent uprising is the only way to succeed (and I will disagree) but please don’t argue that we simply need to squash the Tea Party and get the House under Democratic control or that all we need to do is hang Liberals and impeach Obama. You will be succumbing to the Oligarchy’s desire to divide and subjugate. I suggest that if we engage sincerely we will find that we have similar ideas about what our intrinsic values are. And we can get on with the business of shaping our future and rise above the machinations of President Snow (yes we can learn something from the Hunger Games).