tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1589416638408735920.comments2011-10-09T21:40:05.025+02:00Jacob's LadderAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03226645009750781959noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1589416638408735920.post-61535534370479332452011-10-09T21:40:05.025+02:002011-10-09T21:40:05.025+02:00Hi Manny
Thank you for taking the time to think ov...Hi Manny<br />Thank you for taking the time to think over and respond. I agree with you to some extent. I think it is to a degree still just a protest, even now, despite several hundred cities in the US and elsewhere around the world be held. But I also think the protesters' own identification with revolution, that they are calling it so, and that many I know that aren't directly participating, are also calling it so. I read today that a Swedish variation on the theme will take place in Stockholm, being called an "anti-capitalism" protest. That to me, knowing something of the culture of Sweden, tells me it is at least an attempt at revolution, and even in some Marxist sense.<br /><br />Mostly, my point was that it looks similar to the French Revolution in that it is not goal based. And the more people who join a non-goal based movement, the more difficult will be the achievement a goal based movement. If we look at any group or period, we will find many, many contradictions and contentions, the American Revolution no exception. I do think there was a main focal point or purpose to that Revolution, with certain critical texts, such as Paine's Common Sense, etc. Leadership was a factor. The American had leadership. The French removed its leadership, got a war general to fill the power vacuum.<br /><br />However, I agree, it isn't per se a revolution. I do give them credit for striving for it. We do need change on this little world! Since I have a choice, I won't be joining the angry mob just because they are angry at some of the same things I'm angry at. I'd like to see more organization than is currently had.<br /><br />I read today that Gbowee, one of 2011's Nobel Peace Prize winners "emphasized how important it was for [the] protesters to have a clear goal", here: http://goo.gl/5geFL<br /><br />Thanks again for your comment.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03226645009750781959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1589416638408735920.post-41819900252337197282011-10-07T20:21:56.099+02:002011-10-07T20:21:56.099+02:00After considering it for a while, I think there is...After considering it for a while, I think there is something philosophically wrong with your basic idea. This is not a revolution. This is not a rebellion. This is still just a protest, and barely one at that. It's aspiring toward a mass movement, getting people off the couch as it were. I suppose it's a positive comment that you give them the credit of being a full-fledged revolution, but the fact remains that revolutions are not cut and dry. The American one was full of contention, full of British loyalists and even afterward was debated for years about being the correct course of action. As a friend mentioned, at least these people are doing something, and are getting their asses kicked for it. That's bravery, my friend.mannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03311888368104378415noreply@blogger.com