I mean that’s a nice sentiment, but it’s not the late 19th century anymore. Even if it was, that’s not really how revolutions worked in the past.
The majority of revolutions that have been successful in the past have sprung from pre-arranged hierarchical bodies like the military. There is a reason the US military was developed to be domestically apolitical, and is forbidden to operate in any real sense within the United States.
If there is some sort of revolution it’s perfectly reasonable to assume there will be Martyrs, it’s also perfectly reasonable to not want to willingly participate in martyrdom.
I honestly don’t understand how you can read what I’m saying and think that I must be specifically talking about people martyring themselves or violent political revolutions and I would really appreciate it if you could just take my words for granted without making broader inferences about them.
And when there’s finally enough people, nobody has to “go first”.
I mean, it’s what the person you responded to was talking about… Am i supposed to “take your words for granted” and also assume you were making a point completely disjointed from the original context?
so like I’ve spent a lot of time studying history and revolutions and political movements, so personally when I see somebody say something as vague as “we should do something about this ourselves instead of expecting other people to” it’s very hard for me to assume that they must be talking specifically about violently overthrowing the government.
If you’ve spent a lot of time studying history and revolutions…in your opinion, what does it mean when someone says “we should take care of this ourselves”?
In reference to our current political situation, how else would an individual or a small group of like minded individuals “take care” of the situation?
I mean that’s a nice sentiment, but it’s not the late 19th century anymore. Even if it was, that’s not really how revolutions worked in the past.
The majority of revolutions that have been successful in the past have sprung from pre-arranged hierarchical bodies like the military. There is a reason the US military was developed to be domestically apolitical, and is forbidden to operate in any real sense within the United States.
If there is some sort of revolution it’s perfectly reasonable to assume there will be Martyrs, it’s also perfectly reasonable to not want to willingly participate in martyrdom.
I honestly don’t understand how you can read what I’m saying and think that I must be specifically talking about people martyring themselves or violent political revolutions and I would really appreciate it if you could just take my words for granted without making broader inferences about them.
I mean, it’s what the person you responded to was talking about… Am i supposed to “take your words for granted” and also assume you were making a point completely disjointed from the original context?
so like I’ve spent a lot of time studying history and revolutions and political movements, so personally when I see somebody say something as vague as “we should do something about this ourselves instead of expecting other people to” it’s very hard for me to assume that they must be talking specifically about violently overthrowing the government.
If you’ve spent a lot of time studying history and revolutions…in your opinion, what does it mean when someone says “we should take care of this ourselves”?
In reference to our current political situation, how else would an individual or a small group of like minded individuals “take care” of the situation?
well buckle up…