It's more radical to support this system than to call for peaceful revolution.

[originalpckelly]

You have to think it's moderate to disenfranchise tens of millions of Americans from loyal representation in Congress.

You have to think it's moderate to support a government structure that is so dysfunctional, it's leaders committed grave violations of human rights in secret.

You have to think that:
Employees at the top of the executive branch will have more loyalty to the American people, than to the person who can hire or fire them (the President of USA.)
People who donate hundreds of thousands of dollars to politicians expect no special treatment in return.
People will hand over information that is self-incriminating, rather than marking it "Top Secret" to hide it from public scrutiny.
A Congress and presidency controlled by the same party will check itself, as the US Constitution calls for.
Power is held by the US government first, then delegated to the states and then to the people, rather than quite the opposite.
The code of laws at the federal level is simple enough to remember by heart, and if not that people can be expected to follow laws they don't
understand.
The Congressional record is complete, public and easily read.
Rich people and companies won't eventually buy off (capture) the authorities that regulate them, though that's happened repeatedly in history.
People who went to poor inner-city schools had the same chances in life as those who went to expensive private schools.
Homelessness after a cessation of work isn't a form of coercion, though the people who are rich in this country can stop working tomorrow and they'll have a place to live.
People who are rich enough to buy an expensive house don't have enough money to pay the property taxes on that house, and that little old ladies living off of social security can afford to pay property taxes (and eat.)
It's an act of encouraging dissent to patrol public demonstrations with automatic machine guns.
People who are the targets of public demonstrations will be able to hear dissent, when the dissenters are out of earshot and eyesight, locked in a free speech cage.

No, no, it's not outrageous and unreasonable to support this system, it's outrageous and unreasonable to call for revolution. :eyes:

[originalpckelly]

1. Made it a tad easier to read, in one way...

Can't help if it's uncomfortable to look in the mirror...

[stillcool]

2. I don't know how you can have..

"Democracy" or "Revolution", without any semblance of 'we the people'. I doubt that the different factions that do nothing but call each other names are even interested in keeping this country whole.

[originalpckelly]

3. I don't think I understand your post...

Its tone is unclear, what do you mean?

[stillcool]

7. I meant that Democracy or

revolution needs a significant amount of the population involved...No?

[originalpckelly]

4. Dial R for Revolution.

[scheming daemons]

5. "peaceful revolution" is an oxymoron

Revolution involves overturning the status quo quickly. If it happens peacefully, then it isn't "revolution".

[originalpckelly]

6. Nothing in the definition specifies violence...

what you fail to understand is that all the people who cause the violence have minds, and those minds can be changed if they're are reasoned with.