So you want a revolution.......

[Mr Hyde]

Those who vanquish their oppressors tyranny later on become tyrants themselves.

What is the use in revolution?

Revolution in the traditional sense does nothing more than repeat the failures of the past.

[billyjack]

you clean your house knowing full well that it'll get dirty again. but i still enjoy cleaning my place up and the peace of mind which always follows.

[Mr Hyde]

you clean your house knowing full well that it'll get dirty again. but i still enjoy cleaning my place up and the peace of mind which always follows.

So it is done for the illusion of appearance and a false sense of security then,no?

[billyjack]

So it is done for the illusion of appearance and a false sense of security then,no?

see this is where we differ. i dont treat appearances as illusions. but i'll play

a new order to a society isnt an illusion. its new isnt it--so how can that be an illusion? who's to say that this sense of security is false? sure the apple will eventually lose its shine, but thats how the world works. i can still feel good and secure about this new order while it shines. There's no way to know for certain that a new order will repeat the same mistakes of the old. History doesnt dictate the present or future. the present dictates our perspective on history

[Mr Hyde]

see this is where we differ. i dont treat appearances as illusions. but i'll play

a new order to a society isnt an illusion. its new isnt it--so how can that be an illusion? who's to say that this sense of security is false? sure the apple will eventually lose its shine, but thats how the world works. i can still feel good and secure about this new order while it shines. There's no way to know for certain that a new order will repeat the same mistakes of the old. History doesnt dictate the present or future. the present dictates our perspective on history

History repeats.

The present is just another repeat as there is nothing new about it beyond appearances.

The appearance has changed but the players have remained the same through and through.

[billyjack]

History repeats.

The present is just another repeat as there is nothing new about it beyond appearances.

The appearance has changed but the players have remained the same.

eternal recurrence??

[Mr Hyde]

eternal recurrence??

Define.

[billyjack]

i think you know this already. nietzche's horrible/joyfull take on the universe.

"I will come back," muses Zarathustra, "with this sun, with this earth, with this eagle, with this serpent - not for a new life or a better life, but to the same life I am now leading. I will come back unto this same old life, in the greatest things and in the smallest, in order to teach once more the eternal recurrence of all things." ((2))

indefinable but the seasons of the year represent it well

[manolia]

There are different kinds of revolution. By saying that revolution is useless you make a generalisation. What about nations that are enslaved by other nations and fight for their freedom? Are those revolutions useless?

[Mr Hyde]

i think you know this already. nietzche's horrible/joyfull take on the universe.

"I will come back," muses Zarathustra, "with this sun, with this earth, with this eagle, with this serpent - not for a new life or a better life, but to the same life I am now leading. I will come back unto this same old life, in the greatest things and in the smallest, in order to teach once more the eternal recurrence of all things." ((2))

indefinable but the seasons of the year represent it well

And what goes in your mind reading such a parable?


There are different kinds of revolution. By saying that revolution is useless you make a generalisation. What about nations that are enslaved by other nations and fight for their freedom? Are those revolutions useless?

Slaves overthrow their masters only for themselves to enslave others another day just as their previous masters before them once they themselves come to master.

[billyjack]

And what goes in your mind reading such a parable?

well, i think it justifies revolutions and gives point to the pointless

[Mr Hyde]

well, i think it justifies revolutions and gives point to the pointless

How? :)

[billyjack]

How? :)

the eternal recurrence is a declaration of affirmation. in the long run everything eventually could be construed as pointless, bound to repeat itself, be it a revolution or brushing your teeth. However, this circle of repetition is how things seem to work and the eternal recurrence viewpoint finds point in the circle itself.

So, revolution is only pointless if you view it outside the context of the whole, that is, as a thing-in-itself (which doesnt exist). If you were to compare society with nature, revolution could be seen as the wild fire that eventually produces new, fertile ground for growing.

[Bitterfly]

What is the use in revolution?


Why don't you examine concrete examples of revolutions, before generalizing?
If I look at the French revolution, or even the English and American ones, I don't quite agree with you: what they implemented took time to steady itself, but in the long run brought about quite good results. I would not have liked to live in feodal times, even as an aristocrat, therefore despite the massacres and the temporary insanity of France's revolutionaries, I think the French revolution was a good thing.

[TheInsomniac]

The website's I list here portray the new revolution in the global economy.

The whole idea of this new concept is an abolishment of all governing institutions(political, monetary, credit, media), an abolishment of the entire monetary system. This change will then see our world change from a highly competetive economic global slavery based world, and revolutionise it into a resource based economy. The resource based economy is based on effectively utilizing the current resources we have on the planet to make everything in abundance, and therefore changing human conditioning itself. Crimes will fall, there will be no need for 90% of the laws we have today. This revolution will not go backwards. A revolution that revolves around changing of the hierarchy and distributing wealth, will always become corrupt, as it is in the physical conditioning a human is brought up in that depends what his/her instincts and will power to make decisions will be.

Nonetheless, i highly recommed you watch the two movies, Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist:Addendum at www.zeitgeistmovie.com. (Just click on the pictures and it should start).

www.thezeitgeistmovement.com - Will explain every question you ask.
www.thevenusproject.com - Is the concept of a new world, and all according infomation.

[yanni]

....for promoting the stability of the international monetary and financial system—the system of international payments and exchange rates among national currencies that enables trade and financial transactions to take place between countries. The Fund's job is to promote economic stability, help prevent crises, and help resolve them when they do occur, thereby promoting growth and alleviating poverty. Its three main activites—surveillance, technical assistance, and lending—are intended to meet these goals.

[Judas130]

revolution

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, esp. one made suddenly and often accompanied by violence. Compare social evolution.
3. a sudden, complete or marked change in something: the present revolution in church architecture.
4. a procedure or course, as if in a circuit, back to a starting point.
5. a single turn of this kind.

Aristotle described two types of political revolution:

1. Complete change from one constitution to another
2. Modification of an existing constitution. (The Politics V)

''The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall.'' - Che Guevara

Revolution is not the same as the power it overthrows. The Ideology and the means to achieve revolution vary depending on where, who, and when. In the short term things may be beneficial to a state, or things may be bad, depending on the means. If its the working class overthrowing the upper, then the balance of power shifts, and with time the working classes will have the power the upper once had, so in that way, with the balance of power, they become 'like' the previous position of power. Sometimes, words aren't always enough to prove your point. However, Hitler worked his way up the ranks in a legitimate way, becoming chancellor and getting his party later voting in, so things can be done fairly. Yet usually the power just can't be shifted, and things get pushed and pushed until one side takes control with violence. And then people listen.

with history, you must look at things in context. To generalise leads to un-noteworthy assertion. History is fact, it happened, it wont again. Similar things might, but Abraham lincoin won't abolish slavery for a second time, will he?

:thumbs_up

[kristian]

I think I understand the point of Mr. Hyde. Do you mean like A enslaves B. B then overthrew A through revolution however, it still ended up with B enslaving B? Therefore enslaving is still there, seems like revolution did not really changed the picture.
Did i get it right?

Well you see I believe in Hegel's Thesis, Anti-thesis, and Synthesis. nuff said.

[librarius_qui]

Revolution is impredictable. One cannot predict, or plan. When it has to happen, it happens. Our "age" is too marked by this ideology (that things only change through revolutions) because our time began with the French revolution (my analysis (...)). It's probably the most important historical event of leaving the "medieval past", and jumping to the "industrial present".

Now, how are things going to change, then?

Fact is that we cannot foresee. We can have some hints, but not certainties. And we can hope our opinions are heard. For instance, I'd love the next step of humanity to be to conquer the Solar system! To make colonies on the Moon, and Mars, and Jupiterian Europa ... Who knows someone will hear me!

It's waaaay better than to kill each other (and the planet) because of government systems or religious stands!, for heaven's sake!

(Have you ever taken a look at Jupiterian Europa? It's the most beautiful thing I've ever seen!!! But we need to work a lot to reach that place ... We're at the same time so close, and so far away from there, in many senses.)

Toughts ...
My thoughts.


lbr_q
:crash:

[muazjalil]

On a lighter note, From Douglas Adams "Anything that happens, happens. Anything that, in happening, causes something else to happen, causes something else to happen. Anything that, in happening, causes itself to happen again, happens again. It doesn't necessarily do it in chronological order, though."...............very much applicable to revolution.

[blazeofglory]

Those who vanquish their oppressors tyranny later on become tyrants themselves.

What is the use in revolution?

Revolution in the traditional sense does nothing more than repeat the failures of the past.

I have preference for evolution not revolution. Revolution stirs up violence and evolution is what leads us to a state that is totally changing us for the better.

[Mr. Vandemar]

No, Revolution is thought put into action (Emma Goldman). It only connotates violence, it does not denote it.

[blazeofglory]

All that I understand by revolution notwithstanding the fact that its figurative meaning is different.

I have read most revolutions in history have undergone phases of bloodshed and none was clean of it and to think about a revolution clean of blood and violence is almost impossible.

Revolution is what takes us towards conflict, and evolution is a different thing altogether, for through evolution we advance in physical and virtual domains.

Man has evolutionarily through scientific education reached thus far.

I do not mean all revolutions were anachronistic. Not all. But most revolutions have been bloodily counterrevolutionary.

[0=2]

Revolution means, literally, coming full circle. Evolution and revolution share a common latin root, "volvo", which means circle, more or less. A rounding might be a bit more accurate of a translation. This could be seen as quite ironic considering hte current scientific dogma of linear progress, one of it's supporting pillars being our sense of "evolution" or "progress". If all was circular progress would be regress.

And revolution would be hardly a "change", but rather the balancing of a scale. Another sad but funny bit of coincidence(which, coincidentally, do not exist) is that those who view themsselves as "counter-culture" are simply reactionary to the culture at large, and therefore dependant on that culture equally as the dogma junkees they claim to hate and oppose. You've simply chosen the opposite side of the duality.

Anarchism only exists with order. You are hardly "fighting" anything but participating in a conversation that will end where it begins, the same place, nowhere. They NEED that direct opposition to continue, all this rioting has no point, it has no purpose, except for the one THEY gave it. They built the ghettoes to burn, and you took the bait. Effigies. Homes for fairies or gingerbread, waiting to be eaten, toyedwith, or torched.

So, if your intent is to destroy our society, please do so with greater efficiency.

That being said, I am all for the complete and utter destruction of America and the world as it stands today. Why? Not because I believe in some moral highground, not because I believe in a "better" tomorrow, or "hope" or "change" or any other ****e euphemism.

I want to see hte complete and utter destruction of America and it's parential parrots because of aesthetics, nothing more nothing less. (we're all aesthetic beings, whether or not we appreciate it)

Watching big things burn is pretty, and works within the character I have painted myself. So...

VIVA LA REVOLUTION! And

ANARCHY IN THE U.K.!

[billyjack]

That being said, I am all for the complete and utter destruction of America and the world as it stands today. Why? Not because I believe in some moral highground, not because I believe in a "better" tomorrow, or "hope" or "change" or any other ****e euphemism.

I want to see hte complete and utter destruction of America and it's parential parrots because of aesthetics, nothing more nothing less. (we're all aesthetic beings, whether or not we appreciate it)

Watching big things burn is pretty, and works within the character I have painted myself. So...

VIVA LA REVOLUTION! And

ANARCHY IN THE U.K.!

i agree with most of the premises of your post. however, you sound like a pyro and a bit like the joker character from the new batman movie...just wanting to see the world in flames bc you'd like to watch it burn.

we are aesthetic beings, no doubt. but aesthetics exist better within a society than they do amid complete chaos. similar to the aesthetics of a garden: the beauty is found within the garden itself, but the gardener (the societal customs and laws) brings about the full potential of the plants (individuals) and their beauty

[0=2]

Mmmmm see that metaphor you used implies the thing it was supposed to encompass. Beauty is an aesthetic.

And chaos is an order.

On a different note, meaning this isn't necessarily targetted toward you, billyboy,

If any of you are interested in something past the kiddie morales of current "revolutionaries" I would recommend google or wkiatizing "The Coyotel Way". I found it a good summation of various ideas into a package easily accepted by those seeking societies destruction.

[billyjack]

am familiar with the trickster character of the coyote in native american literature. his importance lies in attuning society on to a new path, not in destroying it. and yes, i agree that society needs some maintenance, we've been putting it off way too long, especially in the states with our self-hate and celebrity-love, disgusting

back to that metaphor. not only is beauty an aesthetic in a garden, it also keeps one plant from strangling another.

[0=2]

Or it makes one plant strangle another.

The fact of the matter is... civilizations fall. People kill. It's beautiful really. Why? Because it is. Why deem it ugly?

I see this as a defence mechanism. "I'm not that, because that is ugly, and I am not ugly, because I am pretty." Replace ugly and pretty with any other adjective.

Any "destruction" of society is simply an interaction it created. This is why counter-culture is culture. Culture creates it's counter to stabilize it's base. But a counter is a base. Culture cultivates it's own demise within it's garden. It plants the weeds, along with the flowers, and the carrots, and the fields and fields of reed canary grass it acidifies to permeate it's base. (a wink and a nudge to those who laughed and got)

It's all part of the interplay, it's all a godly creation, or a godless creation.

[billyjack]

no strangling if gardener is doin his craft wisely

so counter culture is another leg for society to stand on, stabilize itself. i'll buy that.

people killing people as beautiful?....neccessary for beautiful things to exist might be more like it.

not godly creation. godly growth, or godless growth

[0=2]

Why shouldn't it be deemed beautiful?

I find corpses to be quite exquisite, abstract as this may all seem(hope someone catches all these puns), it exists. Death, that is. Well, assuming this is existence, and there is a something for my percpetion ot bounce and self-impose off of.

Why not see it as a beauty of sorts?

[billyjack]

a mountain top perspective might find joy in whats typically ugly from ground level. but to quote nietzsche,

do not stay in the field
do not climb out of sight
the best view of the world
is from a medium height

perhaps a look from each perspective is necessary before .jumping to conclusions

[0=2]

And this, my friend, is where we reach an agreement.