Tuesday, January 8, 2008

The thing governments most fear

Angry and radicalized citizens taking it to the streets. A commenter at The Oil Drum sez:
Point in fact, there are two reasons that even more farmers did not lose their farms. First, radical action. The corporate ideologues who shape our school system are loathe to point out that the depression radicalized many. Farmers came together and blocked roads to farms up for auction, declared farm holidays (much like bank holidays) where they refused to participate in auctions, and generally threw monkey wrenches in the machinery of the corporation and its banks. The second reason there were not more foreclosures was due to the Frazie-Lemke Farm Bankruptcy Act (1934) which suspended farm foreclosures for five years.
Another commenter adds:
That what gov’s (I know it is in the US) fear the most. Millions of people in the street and radicalized. All the repeals of laws on demostrating, Marshal law changes, etc.
Listen to a lesson learned by the establishment put into words by G. Gordon Liddy in his reply to Timothy Leary.
Leary "...During the Sixties an undeclared civil war took place and the right side won."
"Yeah, my side," says Liddy. "And we're not about to let it happen again."
"We're not about to let it happen again.
THAT'S when the start of the control of all media to a few companies became an objective of the people who Liddy was talking about.
Notice how we in the states NEVER saw on nightly news nearly ANYTHING on demonstrations on BUSH around the world a few years ago.
Radicalized people in the streets are their greatest fear.
Hence the propaganda, the various Patriot Acts, "homegrown terrorism act", shredding of the Bill of Rights, and so on. Once the jig is finally up and an angry homeless formerly middle-class mob begin demanding heads of CEOs on sticks, the powers that be know that they need to create just enough of a barrier between themselves and the rabble. Maybe those Blackwater-operated Hummers with well-armed mercenaries taking potshots will do the trick, at least temporarily. Economic depressions tend to bring out the worst in those with the most to lose - and if I were to bet, I'd be betting on a depression in the future. Unlike the 1930s, there aren't the natural resources or the necessary infrastructure with which to rebuild, hence my dismissal of claims that we're on the verge of a new "progressive era" along the lines of the mythical 1930s-1960s. We may be on the verge of something else, the likes of which are bound to be considerably different from what happened during the mid-20th century. I'm guessing that the concept of sustainability will gain increased currency by the next election cycle and come to dominate political discourse for the foreseeable future with the primary issue being how to balance a sustainable existence within the bounds of our natural resources with the desire for material comforts.

No comments:

Post a Comment