What would you do? (Police State Poll #2)

[plurality]

Poll question: What would you do? (Police State Poll #2)

Okay, you've come to the conclusion that the government is a violent, oppressive, police state, and action must be taken to reclaim the freedom of yourself and everyone else. What actions would you take?

[boobooday]

1. I believe in protest too

We need massive non-violent protest of government AND media. Hundreds of thousands, overwhelming numbers.

During the run-up to war, the left proved that we can mobilize. Time to roll!

http://www.wgoeshome.com

Jeanette

[420montana]

2. Great poll question as it

may come to this. The survivalist types will have no chance against the Blackhawks but a little bloodshed may go a long way. Free people have always been pushed to the point of revolution. Always.

[plurality]

3. Thanks and welcome to DU

And never discount a small group with the backing of the people. Of course that would be priority number 1. After all if it's not for the people then who is it for?

[BiggJawn]

51. Oh, won't they?

Ah, another "But they have HELICOPTERS! And TANKS!!" apologist.
The "Most High-Tech Army in the World" is sure having a cake-walk against all those home-mades, aren't they?

Your meme gets discredited every day in the news. Karl needs to find a new song.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

4. "Wolverines!"

That might need some explaining to some folks here :evilgrin:

[plurality]

5. Unfortunately that was the only thing I could come up with

that would be understandable by many and still slip by as not being too specific and not draw any ECHELON eyes.

Plus, I figure most of the people who would choose that option probably have that movie memorized.

[G_j]

6. which is why

this may not be an appropriate discussion for DU?




on edit, to explain further.

to find the need to use what I guess could be called a code word to sheild a discussion from snooping eyes in a public forum says to me that perhaps it's a discussion that is not appropriate.
I would not want anyone who was lets say,
not "savy" to say something they really shouldn't. Maybe I'm just paranoid.. :shrug:

[plurality]

7. that depends on your interpretation

and its remained open for several hours so evidently the mods don't mind it.

on edit: i understand your concern and i share. i guess i think most people are smart enough to not say anything they shouldn't. at the same time i think it's important that people aren't alone in their feelings. feeling like you're the only one bothered by this can lead to desperation, and desperation is no good.

[G_j]

8. yes

and I did not hit alert, btw.

I trust the mods to know whats appropriate. As I said maybe I'm just a bit paranoid.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

9. It's not a "code word" and I don't think he was being deceptive at all

The reference may be obscure, but I think it's easy enough to figure out he means armed resistance. It is most certainly an appropriate topic for DU, because armed resistence to tyranny is one of the basic founding principles of our country and democracy in general.

[G_j]

14. I agree that

"because armed resistence to tyranny is one of the basic founding principles of our country and democracy in general"

and though I don't think it's a viable option (I adhere stricktly to non-violent principals, & it wouldn't work) personally I don't feel comfortable discussing it. Call it a sixties flasback.

[liberal72]

55. Instead of "Wolverines" . . . . . .

Use Rage Against the Machine. The name implies fighting an opressive government. Plus their music was great.

[Az]

10. Movie reference

Red Dawn. The underground resistance group was known as the Wolverines.

[MAlibdem]

36. So is my highschool mascot (n/t)

[Silverhair]

11. The new police state will be far more subtle.

"Wolverines" won't work. It will be like fighting a fog with a sword.

All police states require the gathering of internal information to target "enemies of the people". Most of the oppressive measures, such as internal passports, etc, are for the purpose of keeping track of who is doing what so that you can find and remove the threats early.

But the new world, where most of your letters will go by email, (Stop using paper - it uses trees.), everything you buy will have an RFID attached so a record of who buys what can be kept (Hey, this guy that lives in the city is buying fertilizer, & diesel fuel?), many people will have personal RFIDs implanted under the skin, (Already in manufacture. Google: "Verachip"), your cell phone will constantly track you to withing 100 meters and remember it was when, (And can be remotely turned on to "listen only".), your car will always give out it's GPS location, and computer monitoring will constantly scan the internet for suspicious activities, banks will automatically report all transactions, then the police will have a far easier time IDing the person who is becoming radicalized. Suddenly that person's bank account starts getting screwed up, credit cards are canceled, etc. (Oh, my. It looks like a case of stolen identity. It may take years to clean up your bank & credit records Mr. Activist. We are sorry that the police stopped you, but your car was listed as stolen.)

Message boards like DU & FR will be allowed to operate unhindered. They will serve several purposes.
1. Allow otherwise productive citizens to blow off steam. Great safety valve.
2. Help ID those who are drifting into radicalization while in the early stages, so they can be watched more closely.
3. Helps keep the gov't informed of the amount of heat in the radical elements.
3. Some new ideas will also be gleaned from the sites, and implemented by the gov't.

OH YES, and there will be elections too. Real ones. You see, the mass of the people will WANT the new police state because they will be afraid after the coming really big terrorist strike.

The real horror part, is that it doesn't matter whether a Democrat or Republican is in office, or who controls the congress. IT WILL HAPPEN.

[Az]

13. Wolverines assumes the infrastructure has collapsed

It is the reaction once miltary law is put in place. Ordinary commerce has collapsed. Communication is only available for those in control. That is the Wolverine scenario.

[Silverhair]

15. At that point you have mass starvation.

A collapse of the infrastructure means no groceries to the grocery store. Ordinary communications are vital to keeping economy running, even at a subsistance level. The new police state will want you to have your regular day-to-day freedoms. They will want you to be moderately prosperous, happy, and with a stake in the status quo. Only the unhappy want to rock the boat.

Have you read, "Brave New World"? A complete tryanny WANTS the people happy, or at least to think they are happy.

[Az]

16. Martial law assumes

Distribution is controlled by the military. Thus the population is made compliant due to their need for supplies. This is where the wolverines come into play. They grab supply lines and disrupt their control of the supplies. Therebye opening the possibility of revolution.

[Silverhair]

19. Perhaps. But I forsee a police state as I outlined.

Against that type of police state, traditional armed resistance would be useless. We would need new types of weapons. Computer viruses? Maybe that geek hacker will be the revolutionary soldier of the future?

[plurality]

25. Electro Magnetic Pulse

'nuff said

[Silverhair]

31. Requires a multi-megaton nuke at very high altitude.

If terrorists get a nuke it will be extremely likely to be a smaller nuke and a surface burst.

Even a big one up high will only effect a few states.

The e-bombs that we are suposed to have, have only localized effects and are very high tech.

[plurality]

32. true, i'm not saying it's doable now.

but it's the only thing that could make a difference i think. and there are ways to make them without a nuke, would just require a creative mind, materials, and time.

[MAlibdem]

38. No

Head to the high country

Better to wolverine it in the mountains than submit to a police state.

Small arms resistance, our army has proven they suck at cave to cave warfare, lol.

I don't see the conspiracies others do tho. I think we just have dishonest people who evade accountibility, but I think they generally play by the rules.

We have a ways to go, a WAYS before anything like that.

[camero]

44. This is the way

It may not be as far off as you think. Alot of what Silverhair has mention is in the pipeline already.

[tom_paine]

28. I thought you didn't believe in that stuff, Silverhair

Every time I or someone else has mentioned this or related topics, you pooh-pooh it as "conspiracy theory" or otherwise dissmiss it.

I'm glad to see you at least see some of what is very likely coming down the pike.

I am afraid you are right about this happening no matter who is in charge.

However, my ferevrent belief is that supporting the Democrats and Democratic Victories will hold the inevitable off for some unspecified number of years, versus the Busheviks who could implement it tomorrow and are certainly speeding up implementation.

Which is the best we can hope for, in your surprisingly :tinfoilhat: (particularly considering how much you've harshed on others for other :tinfoilhat: views) worldview.

Knowing how people...ALL people including myself... are I am guessing that you cannot conceive how your perfect logical and rational theory could be perceived as :tinfoilhat:

(by the way let me again say that I agree with your view, largely, on this issue)

Of course you can't. Welcome to the human race, Silverhair. You're just the same as the people you pooh-pooh and criticize...

[Silverhair]

35. I do dismiss conspiracy theories. Most of them are nutty.

These technology that I speak of is already there. It is being introduced, not as part of a great super conspiracy, but by market forces.

RFID holds the promise of great savings in inventory control, theft avoidance, and greater accuracy. It will also make supermarket checkout faster.

Personal implanted RFIDs are being sold as a way to positively ID a person that can't be lost or stolen. Supermarket scanners are also available from the same company. The idea will be that you won't have to worry about stolen credit cards, etc.

Cell phone tracking is for the purpose of saving electricity for the phone company so they can tight beam your phone call to you, instead of broadcasting 360 degrees.

The Onstar system that some cars have now will become cheaper and have a high demand. GPS positioning systems for cars will become standard. It has been discovered that Onstar can be used to eavesdrop on the car occupants.

So the infrastructure is being developed and installed, without a guiding conspiracy. However, once the demand is there for strong enforcement, the temptation will be to turn to it as a solution to the problems. That demand will occur after the next super terrorist attack.

There WILL be such an attack, no matter how well we guard ourselves. The terrorists have the advantage of the initiative. They chose the target and the method. They have the time to search for our weakness. We may deflect a hundred attacks, but there will still be another, different attack after that. Sooner or later, one will succeed.

I don't hold with conspiracy theories that require extreme complexity, or hordes of operative, or that a person be evil for the sake of evil. I hold to a theory of "Forces of history" that are largely beyond anybody's control.

[plurality]

42. that's why i think a good way to resist would be to try and get out

of the system that uses those things. don't buy new cars, don't pay with credit cards, etc, etc. Sure it can be inconvienent, but it also keeps you under the radar.

[BiggJawn]

52. Then we'd need something different than a sword...

Wouldn't surprise me to see Arschloch on the Toob "We caught this cell by tracking their telephone converstaions and through the "On-Star" system in their SUV's...."

"Morans" like that would deserve to be caught.

[veganwitch]

12. thats it!!! no more watching red dawn!!!

its getting put in a locked drawer when you get home!

lurve ya babe.

edit: as dumb as the movie is, i agree though.

[Silverhair]

17. Red Dawn was an RW fantasy.

I am surprised to see the frequent references to it here at DU. In the movie, America was isolated as the Greens took over Germany and other parts of Europe, and then the USA was attacked and invaded by leftist governments. The Wolverines were on the side of the USA gov't.

[mrgorth]

21. Um

In the movie we were invaded by communist countries, not Norway, C O M M U N I S T. It was the cold war and commies were the bogeymen of the day. Also, the Chinese helped us in the movie. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

[veganwitch]

22. yeah. in the dvd notes...

reagan called it the best movie ever made or something like that. yeah. you definately have russian/cuban evil guys tryin' to stop the 'murikan why of life.

the movie is entertaining if you know the bullshit propaganda.


also, i find it funny that that in th movie, the kids capture a pow and he says his treatment is against the geneva convention and the UN and then patrick swayze puts a bullet between his eyes. early reflection of shrubco?

[mrgorth]

23. The Wolverines

weren't the military. Where the fuck would they have kept anyone. I would've shot the guy too.

[tom_paine]

29. Red Dawn might've been RW, but applies to fighting Totalitarianism

whatever political side it comes down on.

Hence, since we are opposed by a homegrown Right-Wing Totalitarianism with many propaganda (including the use of the Mental Illness smear--at least they aren't imprisoning Gore and Dean yet) similarities and "information revision" similarities to the Old Soviet Union, I think it's quite relevant as entertainment and (to a much lesser degree--it's a sappy movie) moral statement.

[starroute]

18. Subtle, coded, and covert opposition

I've been thinking about this question most of my life -- well, at least going back to when I was 12 or 13 and devouring historical novels. For some reason, I felt a particular sense of identification with stories of political oppression and spent a lot of time asking myself, "What would I do in that situation? How would I express my opposition? What would I do if I was a nobleman? Or a peasant? Or an intellectual?"

I gradually came to the conclusion that different courses of action were appropriate for different people. Noblemen could work from within the system. Peasants hadn't much recourse except pitchforks and torches.

But what appealed most to me, personally, was the sort of thing had gone on in Italy in the early 1800's, when the country was divided and under the thumb of Austria. It was all there in my mother's old "Victor Book of the Opera." There was opera after opera from that period about villainous tyrants and heroic freedom fighters, and the audience loved them. But the operas were always set at a sufficient remove not to risk crackdown -- for example, in one of them the tyrant was the "Governor of Boston."

And it went further. When the people came out into the streets cheering, "Verdi, Verdi," they weren't really expressing an admiration for the composer. Instead, they were calling for Italy to be united under a king of its own: "Victor Emmanuel Rei d'Italia."

Even nonsense phrases can carry a coded meaning to those who know where to look. Think of 50's rock 'n' roll lyrics for example. (Well, those were mostly about sex, but it can work for politics too.) Or consider the 1500's and early 1600's, when subversive ideas were regularly concealed within cryptograms, puns, and other forms of intellectual camouflage.

Religion is a related means of organizing opposition when political organization has been outlawed. Not only are governments generally far more reluctant to crack down on expressions of faith, but most religions are full of sentiments about liberation and not being a slave to the things of this world and so forth. (Think black gospel music here.)

This may not be the bravest method of opposition, but I've always thought it beats getting your head cracked open or your toenails ripped out.

[Silverhair]

20. It works too. Takes a long time, but it is like a tree breaking a rock.

The rock is doomed, it just takes a while.

[rucky]

24. THREE for non-violent civil disobediance?!

It's the most effecive of the choices, but not so effective if there are only three of us.

:(

[plurality]

26. tell me, how well did non-violence work for the concentration camp victims

It's a good method when the oppressor cares about maintaining good PR, but when it doesn't give a shit whether people think it's a good government or not, they'll just stomp you and toss you on the fire with everyone else.

[tom_paine]

30. Nicely said, plurality

I would say the odds are at least 3 to 1 that we have just such Tyrants ruling us currently, and they're jsut waiting for the other shoes to drop.

[Djinn]

39. serious disputable

non violent resistance has only ever worked when other political, environmental, geographic or other forces have reached a critical mass - everyone who espouses the efficiency of non violent resistance uses Ghandi as the poster boy, but it wasnt the non violent protests that caused the end of British rule in India - the fight for independence had already been going on for nearly 100 years, the desertion of Indian troops who joined the AHF (Azad Hind Fouz) or the Indian Independence Army after the war. Atlee's (a socialist)succesion of the staunch imperialist Churchill, also helped.

If it was Ghandi and non-violence alone - India would still be a colony.

I've never been convinced of the power of non-violence, it can be a piece of the war-chest but not the entire thing

[Gung_Fu]

41. Key word being "violent"

How effective is civil disobedience if you live under an violent regime? Wouldn't you just be shot?

[abburdlen]

27. There was a good line somewhere....

I think it went something like this:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

[NoPasaran]

37. But wait! There's more!

WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

[karabekian]

33. violent uprising

"No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

-- Thomas Jefferson

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is no recourse left but in the exertion of the original right of self-defense which is paramount to all forms of positive government."

-- Alexander Hamilton

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."

--Thomas Jefferson

[plurality]

34. Great men...

Unfortunately I think Bush and Ashcroft would have them locked away in Guantanamo.

[Gung_Fu]

40. I don't know.

For me it would be protest and civil disobedience. Unless everything turned into 1984 then I would have to break out the AK. But then again if it went all 1984 you would pretty well have to blow shit up.

[Cascadian]

43. Try to leave the country.

Does anybody think they would try to shoot us or arrest us when we all attempt to cross the border into Canada or Mexico?


John

[camero]

45. I voted for this one too.

If only for the reason to live to fight another day.

[plurality]

46. What do you do when there's nowhere left to run? n/t

[Cascadian]

47. Does anybody think that there could be violence?

I know that many people would not stand for the loss of their rights and freedoms. I think there could be some insurrection of some kind if martial law was put in place. the only trouble is that the police, feds, and the military have the technology and firepower to supress such a thing from happening. I hope nothing of this sort happens. Martial law or Civil War. I really don't!

:scared:

John

[plurality]

48. it could happen, freeper types have been going after it a while

It all depends. As far as the technological invincibility of the military, look at Iraq. Tanks and jets will only go so far. Of course I hope it will never come to this.

[Cascadian]

49. me too

It would truly be the end of this country.


John

[BiggJawn]

50. "John has a Long Moustache"....

[tom_paine]

54. "This is Radio Free America with music and the truth until dawn"

You know, someone needs to beam that station into the heart of the Amerikan Empire right now.

Of course, Imperial Forces would crush them like bugs if they caught them...not quite as harshly (yet) but otherwise an identical response as the Soviets or Nazis would have.

[hellhathnofury]

53. Switzerland...

nuff said.