Captiv8 wrote:

---

The ruling class' fear of losing control is precisely what can be leveraged against them by the ruled. An actual revolution threatens the entire system and ultimately replaces the powers that be, whereas the threat of evolution can be used as a bargaining chip. While the government may not want to fund long-term social programs, doing so is clearly better than losing their authority. The key is to create enough of a groundswell and dissenting inertia that a large-scale revolution is imminent. Indeed, it may be necessary to actually launch a revolt to remove notions of fucking around and empty threats.

That said, the only way a revolution transitions from thought to action is if enough people are oppressed, reach a feeling of nothing left to lose, or realize that a change is for the greater good in the long run. This is relatively easy to do with this that are already disenfranchised and disillusioned. What such a movement hinges upon is convincing comfortable middle class and higher citizens to risk their material comforts for a more equitable society. How do you persuade people that the community is greater than the family or self? I don't know. This is where the republican ideals of rugged individualism and liberty are harmful. They promote a way of thinking that is selfish and therefore will inherently affect an imbalance. So maybe something truly radical needs to happen. I'm not talking the finale of Fight Club here, but it really would be nice to eradicate the monetary and credit systems.

---