Welcome to the United States of Imperial Russia!

[Tyler Durden]

As a student of history, I am both shocked at the exacting nature of the parallels and gratified by the exoneration of my constant comparisons of the current status of US politics and the Republican Party to Imperial Russia and the Romanovs of the 1880's to terminus at Tsarskloe Selo.

The power structure in this country has so completely wrapped itself in the Flag, the toady Media, and its own press and propaganda that it has gone completely blind.

We are in the same situation Russia found itself in 1914, with the unacknowledged public perception of the Tsar (Bush) to be a fool with Rasputins and the Aristocracy at every turn subverting power for their own ends. Disaster is in the offing.

We, as they, love the "Rodina," but we will not die for the Tsar. Bush has not asked that yet of the general public, but he has made the first error of all Autocracies which is to equate the "LEADER" with "THE MOTHERLAND," and has called on the armies to die for him. As this happens, all becomes quiet: where are the protests? Conversely, where are the rallies? In history, "no news is good news" cannot be more wrong, as dissent gone underground becomes the powderkeg of the masses: the common people need not storm the Bastille; as they are already armed. The army will not fight them. The National Guard cannot fight the NRA.

Where does this leave us, the common workers? Where else? In the crossfire. When the Serfs finally tire of the latest generation of Romanovs and their oppression, the bloodbath will be horrific, and there will be no solace that the first blood shed was that of the Kulaks.

History is repeating itself, and I no longer believe we can stop it.

[Tyler Durden]

1. One bump.

I guess nobody else believes this way, or at least they don't want to admit it. Pessimism is not exactly cheerful, but it can be honest.

[Q]

4. Autocracy or Plutocracy?

- The Bushies are 'successful' because they have powerful elements of society on their side. This is exactly the type of government founders like Jefferson warned us about: government by the wealthy few.

- But you're right: people don't want to hear about it. They don't want to acknowledge the end of Democracy. They don't want to admit that more than a few 'Democrats' are cooperating with the enemy for their own selfish reasons.

- This type of 'government of the wealthy few' couldn't happen in a two party system without both parties participating.

[bryant69]

7. Let's assume this is correct

Let's assume that Democracy is a joke.
Let's assume that the wealthy few run everything.
Let's assume that all us ordinary people have no power.

What the hell are you doing wasting your time on a board dedicated to Democratic Politics? Why don't you go out and start formenting revolution. Start organizing revolutionary cells to take down the government. Start blowing up Post Offices and ROTC buildings. Start the revolution.

I mean if I believed that Democracy is a joke, that's what I'd be doing.

But I don't. I certainly believe these are troubled times (although it helps to keep a little perspective), but I believe that if we organize around a solid Democratic Candidate and work to get the Democratic vote we can get the white house and the congress back in the hands of Democrats who will start adopting sane policies.

Frankly I don't see much difference between a Freeper coming on and telling us we have loser candidates who are going to fall before the mighty Bush and a far-leftist who comes on to tell us that Democracy is over. The end result is the same, demoralizing those who are working to change the system.

[K-W]

8. I think it is the people

who let that happen, not the parties. The parties can only do what votes tell them to. To an extent they influence public opinion, but at the end of the day they get judged by a vote. The American people arent fufilling thier end of the deal to advocate for themselves politically.

[bryant69]

2. I don't know about this

I mean yeah things are bad for some people, but at the event of the Russian Revolution you had hundreds of thousands starving, if memory serves. Things aren't that bad here yet.

Plus we have an electoral process. I know that some people on here don't have much faith in it--but a lot of people still do, including many of the people who would be most likely to revolt if it didn't exist. I suspect that if President Bush cancelled the election or something similar, than many of us on here who are working towards electing a Democrat would turn our energy to formenting revolt.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

3. not just in the US

really it's all over the world The autocrats are global, there are already riots everywhere. The US won't have a bloodbath, hopefully, but something is going to give

[Tyler Durden]

6. EXACTLY!

The trouble in the rest of the world is simply "problems in the provinces" to the "NEW ROMANOVS."

The signs of the revolt are everywhere if you look for them.

[Tyler Durden]

5. Not Starving? Wait. Elections? Oh REALLY?

When dealing with deprivation, suffering is always relative. Do we have dead in the street from hunger? No, and we may not, but we do have millions out of work and getting ready to become poor and homeless.

As to elections, excuse my tinfoil hat, but I am of the opinion that after the Clinton re-election there hasn't been a truly honest election ANYWHERE in this country, and that the Florida debacle was not the tip of an iceberg, but the cone of Krakatoa preparing to erupt.

Call me a pessimist, but all the signs seem to be lining up.

[Q]

9. Many Americans seem satisfied with the illusion of democracy...

...and the New Corporate Media has forsaken the idea of 'informed consent'.

- It's a foregone conclusion that the 2004 election will be rigged and the New Media will cover for Bush* government failures and corruption.

[Tyler Durden]

11. I think this is an Illusion in and of itself.

The New Romanovs are rallying the faithful to war against the Huns. It's very similar to WWI in context.

When the country is bankrupt and they start closing hospitals (Check Detroit: happening already) and cutting of Social Security to fund the wars (Hello?) the dissent will surface.

Wait.

[smirkymonkey]

15. I completely agree with you as an informal student of

European History, and I am tired of being called pessimistic simply because I am comparing what is going on in this country, now, to the early stages of various empire declines. People won't face it until it is upon them.

I can't understand why so many people refuse to see how much danger we are in at the hands of this administration - we can't really act collectively until a critical mass of people stops denying what is really happening here.

[Tyler Durden]

20. I know exactly what you mean.

I believe that the vast majority would stand on the tracks as long as they had some photogenic fool to tell them that light bearing down on them wasn't a train as long as they say the Pledge of Allegiance often and loud enough.

I think I hear the whistle.

[JVS]

10. Where is our Lenin?

On edit: and who is our Lenin?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

12. hopefully any Lenin-lovers will stay far away

The Leninist vanguard can stay guarding the van for all I care.

[Tyler Durden]

14. Just keep that attitude...

...and when the new Serfs invent their version of Lenin, you'll get lumped in the same place as their conception of "Kulaks."

We can stop this, you know. A bunch of college students eventually stopped the Vietnam War: are we more powerless than they? I'm only saying we are on a bad road, and nobody is trying very hard to even slow the journey down.

[bryant69]

16. Personally, I'd rather be executed as a Kulak

Than throw in with Leninists.

[tom_paine]

22. I would tend to agree with your bryant, BUT

One thing Tyler said is true, if we cannot succeed in restoring the Old Republic within the system, restoring the Constitution and Bill of Rights to vigor, then whatever comes next (lenin, ecch, or some other form of revolutionary chaos, or even a stable, yet oppressive Bushevik Empire) will undoubtedly be worse.

We are on the downslope here, and the speed of decline has pixked up to levels that were unimaginable during the Last Days of the Old Republic.

[smirkymonkey]

17. Your last sentence sums it all up

beautifully. Like we are going to hell in a handbasket and everyone is just enjoying the ride.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

18. I am a new Serf

and I have no interest in Lenin nor Chinese Communism nor Third-way capitalism, that's all.

[Tyler Durden]

19. Lenin/Trotsky/Mao are ANALOGIES for Revolution.

One might as well say that a given religious Icon is the paridigm for all religious belief.

I don't believe Communism wil re-erupt, but I do believe that unless some more Socialist form of government takes over very soon, then the revolutions will start.

Lenin was a fool, Trotsky an arch-Idealist, and Mao a militaristic bastard. I don't like any of them, but when you piss on people long enough, don't blame them when the start tying ropes and hanging the Bourgeois from convenient lamp posts: we did it ourselves in the Revolutionary War to people merely SUSPECTED of being SYMPATHETIC to the British.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

21. there won't be a revolution anytime soon, just more "extreme shopping"

there will be riots - a dodge for the system - and there will be disturbances and looting. I'll be happy with another FDR "reform and preserve" at this point, at least, that's all I can expect from the Democratic party.

I don't see the populace supporting any new authoritarian movement of a Leninist variety, thank God. I'm more worried about fascists, and let's face it the current regime is as close as ever.

[Aidoneus]

27. I'll settle for a New Trotsky instead..

.

[markus]

13. And were is our Trotsky?

eom

[Zuni]

23. our 'trotsky's'

are all around, waiting for the moment to come back when the situation has become so rotten that they can organize a putsch.
Trotsky was in new york, Lenin in Switzerland and Stalin was in Siberia (and many of the other Bolsheviks were also in exile) when the critical mass was reached in Feb. 1917 and the Tsar was forced to abdicate. Then they returned, and in Russia's decay managed to build a vanguard of highly discliplined elites and a very effrective propaganda machine that helped destroy any authority the Kerensky provisional government had.
Under Bush, our democracy has decayed greatly. The Lenins, maos, trotskys, Castros are just waiting for it to decay to the point that hope is lost. That is when they strike.
That is why bush needs to go. More decay of our system will only help radicals do their job.

[lapislzi]

25. Lenin's failure

was that his revolution was a strictly urban, industrial phenomenon, with intellectual leadership. The concerns of the vast majority of ordinary Russians were never addressed (eg, zemstvo system, which actually worked and was abandoned in favor of more radical approaches). No classless society was ever created in Russia. Let's learn from that failure.

[Tyler Durden]

26. I'll give you odds on that one.

I haven't seen any lessons we've learned in my 50+ years that have taken root.

Maybe you're right though, beause this won't be a Revolution of intellectuals, unless you count the Enclavists and other fanatics as intellectuals.

I think the Fascists are up against fascists of another stripe this time, and if revolution comes, we won't see anything for the blood and clouds of smoke.

[HereSince1628]

24. Hmmm, what would = facing the Kaisars troops?

Actually, I think comparing the Romanov's to GW ignores that one family actually had a pretty good education.

BTW The ranch in Crawford doesn't hold a candle to the elegance I saw at Tsarkoe Selo last summer.