Does anyone actually believe that any progress can be made

[T Wolf]

against the Bush* administration in the current political environment?

With the ballot box rigged and no one with any influence fighting against that,

with the media carrying the administration's message without a word of dissent or question, and

with the vast majority of Americans being selfish, lazy, ignorant, assholes who are more interested in the latest "reality" show than what is going on in the world...

how can anyone with more than a single-digit IQ believe that Bush and his junta can be stopped by "normal" means?

I think the key aspect of understanding the enemy, and having any chance of fighting them, is to realize that they do not ever suffer any consequences for their actions.

As any psychologist will tell you, the key factor in a child's socialization is the recognition that actions have consequences. Without those consequences, there is no incentive on the individual's part to control their behavior.

The gang ruling this country now is the epitome of that reality. No matter what they do, they do not have to "pay the piper" for any of their misdeeds. Their kids are not dying in the desert. Their wallets are not hurt by the enormous debt being created. Their mansions are not impacted by the environmental destruction they bring to others.

Until the architects of the disaster of present-day America are directly, personally impacted, they will not change their ways. Change can certainly not be brought about by playing their game (politics) or playing by their rules.

They have turned America into a banana republic and I believe that the only chance for our future is in the tactics of those who fought against the dictatorships of South and Central America. The odds are against us because they do control the military and the police. But a slight chance is better than none.

[FormerDittoHead]

1. Not yet the time, IMO

>They have turned America into a banana republic and I believe that the only chance for our future is in the tactics of those who fought against the dictatorships of South and Central America. The odds are against us because they do control the military and the police.

The key difference between us and a banana republic is a generally corrupt military and police, which I don't believe exists here to any widespread extent. I believe that the vast majority of the military and the police are honest, play the rules and are basically good. (gasp!)

If there *was* widespread corruption in the military and the police, then I would agree to your solution, but I honestly don't see it.

Simply, while the corporate owned leaders currently have a (virtual) monopoly on the MSM, they do not have a monopoly on the TRUTH, and I do believe that people can sense it when presented with it, and our opportunities, I believe, range far greater than you suggest.

If, on the other hand, they *DO* succeed in corrupting the military and police (along with a great many of the people), we are well on our way to becoming a banana republic as you describe.

[JoshK]

2. No - because there's no real opposition party.

I agree with all your remarks, but the above factor is an essential part of the problem.

Kerry just ran a campaign against a liar and a war criminal. He didn't make an issue of the non-existent WMD, nor of Enron's links to Bush, nor of the corporate crime wave in general, nor of Abu Ghraib, nor of the stolen election of 2000, nor of the idea of permanent war. He never said that the Iraq war was really about control of oil, & military bases, & corrupt reconstruction contracts; and thus that Bush had flat-out lied in his asserted reasons for the war. (The strongest denunciation of Bush that Kerry came up with was "I believe the president MISLED the American people." That's pretty mild, on a rough par with "I believe Mr. Capone may have committed some legal infractions.")

In other words, he didn't use ANY of the strongest arguments at his disposal. This is a par excellence example of an "opposition party that doesn't oppose."

[ObliqueFracture]

3. NO They control too much

and have too much power.