If 'regime change' truly begins at home, then how do we get there from here? by Billy Roper
(libertarian)
Friday, January 22, 2010
Revolution is eternal. This is a work in progress, a living document designed to be a flexible strategy, subject to change with more research and greater understanding. I don't have the psychic ability to fill in specific dates and details because it is impossible to predict with any accuracy the changing social and political landscape. I am not a soothsayer. I can't tell you what's going to happen on February 8th, 2012. If we can't recognize what this country looked like two years ago how can we expect to recognize what it will look like two years from now? This document should, instead, be thought of as a schematic diagram for the Revolution. We no longer live in a world where one musket equals one soldier or one broad axe equals one warrior. In ancient times this type of direct revolt had a fair chance of success. We live in modern times, with modern technological advances in weaponry and surveillance. What is needed is a hyper-modern strategy.
When some people think of revolution, they think of guns and bombs and hand grenades. But for us, at this stage of the revolution, our weapons of choice are the pen, the leaflet, the keyboard, the video camera, and every other weapon of mass construction which allows us to reach out to our people and awaken them to the dangers which threaten our very existence. The time may well come when we will communicate to our enemies in a manner which they will find unambiguous, but for now we must lay the foundation and create the support networks which will be necessary for any future endeavors. We must begin with our eyes on our eventual, inevitable victory, and not allow ourselves to become distracted by temporary or unessential concerns. We must, for now, delay gratification, and keep the big picture and our ultimate goal always before our eyes. Discipline, after all, is merely a matter of remembering what it is that we really want.
I. Power
Our movement is a bit like the six blind men feeling an elephant. The first touches the side and thinks it must be a wall; the second touches the tusk and thinks it must be a spear; the third touches the trunk and thinks it must be a snake; the fourth touches the leg and thinks it must be a tree; the fifth touches the ear and thinks it must be a fan; and the sixth touches the tail and thinks it must be a rope.
"So the disputants rail on in ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an elephant
Not one of them has seen!"
I have always been a big believer in the Completion Backwards Principle. In certain chess positions, for example, particularly the endgame, sometimes instead of calculating by brute force it is better to visualize where you want to place your pieces and work your way backwards to a satisfactory solution. Discipline is remembering what it is that you truly want.
What is essential for these events to come to pass is the acquisition of political power. The issue of debate is how to acquire that power.
Since Mao Tse-Tung's maxim that, "Power grows from the end of a gun," is held in such widespread belief let's assume for a moment that it's true. If political power derives solely from force then it would be a mathematical constant that could be calculated as easily as counting the number of bullets in your cartridge box. It would be a concrete object, like Kubrick's monolith in "2001: A Space Odyssey", and the possessor of power would be the one who somehow manages to obtain the obelisk and hold it in his hands.
If this view is correct then our path is clear: we can only hope to win either by A) the voluntary self-restraint and good will of those in power; B) a change in ownership of the obelisk, either through the democratic process, regicide or coup d'etat; or C) the blood-soaked destruction of conventional war, in which I include the more likely strategy of guerrilla warfare.
But consider this: Barak Obama does not point and have cluster bombs come out of his fingertips. Instead he gives an order to someone, who gives an order to someone else, who gives an order to someone else, and on down the line. So it would appear that political power is not the result of force, but rather the result of obedience.
II. Obedience
The relevant question then becomes: why do men obey? One of the major reasons has to be the fear of punishment. No one wants to go to jail and be cellmates with Snoop Dog or Funk Diddy, and no one wants to have a permanent red flag on their record and be blacklisted from securing gainful employment or decent housing. Note that it is not the punishment itself that is the cause of obedience, but rather the sometimes irrational, sometimes very rational, fear of punishment. Punishment by the ruling power is not intended to coerce the citizen to come into compliance with the command, but instead to instill the fear of punishment, and therefore submission, in his fellow subjects.
Another reason for obedience may be direct economic or social reward. The fear of punishment is less important for the ruling group's army of underlings. A Congressman or a Senator might get drunk and kill a girl with his car or write a series of bad checks, but all he has to do is present his Get Out of Jail Free Card and not only can he land on Free Parking, he can still pass Go and still collect 200 dollars. He gets paid for his service to the regime. For him tyranny is profitable, not only through financial gain but also through social status. There's more prestige in being a paid Cabinet member than being paid to build cabinets. With the multiplication of government jobs and government handouts more and more people, even if they are opposed to the regime, may find it in their own self-interest to submit, to comply and to cooperate.
Other reasons may be force of habit or indifference. We may feel a moral obligation to obey, because this is the greatest country on the face of the Earth, gaddummit! We may believe obedience is the most expedient solution because there's no better system; it's for the common good of society; and besides, we believe it helps protect us from undesirable, anti-social people.
It's a matter of the conservation of energy. How, then, can we get some bodies in motion?
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 6
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Billy Roper only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Billy Roper is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Jahfre Fire Eater
Date: 2010-01-23 07:55:55
Hi Billy,
You lost me with your 2nd sentence. What document are you referring to?
It seems like your article was saying we need discipline so as not to lose focus that what we want is I. Power and II. Obedience.
I wish I had just a clue where you are coming from and what you point was. This article seems like the middle of some conversation that I missed the beginning of.
Jahfre, I was referring to "Revolution For Dummies" as if it were a user guide to fomenting dissent and revolt, an actual "how to" for regime change. Those of us who have long swam the currents of political activism know that the hardest tak is herding cats and inspiring others to activism. That's the subject and task I'm looking for input on, here. Thinking out loud.
