3 ms·

How quickly do you think those people would be declared terrorists and neutralized in 2025?

dingnuts 2y ago
why dont you tell us, nazgulsenpai? I mean why bother resist against a tyrannical government right? sheesh. Relevant username.
- nazgulsenpai 2y ago
  I'm not sure what my username has to do with anything, or why the combative tone. It's intended as a thought exercise, if a revolution in the spirit of the French revolution were to happen today, with the surveillance at the government's disposal, how quickly would it be justified legally (declared terrorists) and neutralized. The more time passes, the more technological advances are used for mass surveillance and propaganda, the less likely it seems.
  - metalman 2y ago
    there is a presumption on your part, that control of the net, is absolute revolutions of the past,have all included some control of the press and we can see, everywhere, the frantic efforts to control the net, and digital currency the old axiom of "control the press and the mint, and they can have the rest" is now bieng put to the test, internaly and externaly. the truth bieng that the level of control now possible, real realy realy, is cramping everybodys style, and so the forms of protest and revolution are evolving, and matching the wierdness, insanity for insanity, there IS absolute control , but there is no sure way to describe what exactly is bieng controlled, no revolutionary symbols,check no calls to kill the leaders,check billions of worky workers, worky working, check, trillions of hours spent grinding out an entirely new and evolving memetic language of comunication in a vast never ending seathing quest for some meaning, uh huh.
    - nazgulsenpai 2y ago
      The only presumption I'm making is that technological superiority rests with governments when it comes to implements of surveillance and violence and will likely continue to widen the gap. There's also another somewhat related consideration -- it would be a lot harder to get a military unit of citizens to fire against their fellow citizens than it would be for some operator somewhere to push a button to deploy the murder drones.
darth_avocado 2y ago
We could debate, but when things go out of control, they go out of control fast. Talking about this example specifically, this is Bangladesh. It’s been less than a year when the country stood up against the government, the PM had to flee to save her life and despite the military initially try and squash the protests, gave up very quickly. At the end of the day, they are normal people with families too. What are a few factory owners going to do against thousands of workers who are completely fed up? They are losing their jobs any way, what is stopping them from burning the factory down? This is a country where violence is not unheard of.
- nazgulsenpai 2y ago
  That's a fair point. I was thinking in my own context and not that of the Bangladeshi worker.
  - darth_avocado 2y ago
    In your own context, if everyone is paid less, worked more and then eventually out of a job, there will be no one left to buy stuff from Billionaires. A concept Henry Ford understood really well, but Wall Street doesn’t.
    - pixl97 2y ago
      >but Wall Street doesn’t. Why do they need to, they'll just have the government print more money and give it directly to said billionaires.
      - antifa 2y ago
        Makes you wonder if some kind of underground market would form that ignores billionaires, whether that's a commune or local government establishing a new local currency, that would cause the primary currencies (USD, BTC, etc. to further inflate itself out of existence).
Teever 2y ago
That depends on if they make use of drones to achieve their goals.
hello_moto 2y ago
When the leader starts shooting the people, they lost the country for good. The outcome is either they become a closed-autocratic/dictatorship country or the leader will be ousted super quick.

why dont you tell us, nazgulsenpai? I mean why bother resist against a tyrannical government right? sheesh. Relevant username.

nazgulsenpai 2y ago
I'm not sure what my username has to do with anything, or why the combative tone. It's intended as a thought exercise, if a revolution in the spirit of the French revolution were to happen today, with the surveillance at the government's disposal, how quickly would it be justified legally (declared terrorists) and neutralized. The more time passes, the more technological advances are used for mass surveillance and propaganda, the less likely it seems.
- metalman 2y ago
  there is a presumption on your part, that control of the net, is absolute revolutions of the past,have all included some control of the press and we can see, everywhere, the frantic efforts to control the net, and digital currency the old axiom of "control the press and the mint, and they can have the rest" is now bieng put to the test, internaly and externaly. the truth bieng that the level of control now possible, real realy realy, is cramping everybodys style, and so the forms of protest and revolution are evolving, and matching the wierdness, insanity for insanity, there IS absolute control , but there is no sure way to describe what exactly is bieng controlled, no revolutionary symbols,check no calls to kill the leaders,check billions of worky workers, worky working, check, trillions of hours spent grinding out an entirely new and evolving memetic language of comunication in a vast never ending seathing quest for some meaning, uh huh.
  - nazgulsenpai 2y ago
    The only presumption I'm making is that technological superiority rests with governments when it comes to implements of surveillance and violence and will likely continue to widen the gap. There's also another somewhat related consideration -- it would be a lot harder to get a military unit of citizens to fire against their fellow citizens than it would be for some operator somewhere to push a button to deploy the murder drones.

darth_avocado 2y ago

We could debate, but when things go out of control, they go out of control fast. Talking about this example specifically, this is Bangladesh. It’s been less than a year when the country stood up against the government, the PM had to flee to save her life and despite the military initially try and squash the protests, gave up very quickly. At the end of the day, they are normal people with families too. What are a few factory owners going to do against thousands of workers who are completely fed up? They are losing their jobs any way, what is stopping them from burning the factory down? This is a country where violence is not unheard of.

nazgulsenpai 2y ago
That's a fair point. I was thinking in my own context and not that of the Bangladeshi worker.
- darth_avocado 2y ago
  In your own context, if everyone is paid less, worked more and then eventually out of a job, there will be no one left to buy stuff from Billionaires. A concept Henry Ford understood really well, but Wall Street doesn’t.
  - pixl97 2y ago
    >but Wall Street doesn’t. Why do they need to, they'll just have the government print more money and give it directly to said billionaires.
    - antifa 2y ago
      Makes you wonder if some kind of underground market would form that ignores billionaires, whether that's a commune or local government establishing a new local currency, that would cause the primary currencies (USD, BTC, etc. to further inflate itself out of existence).

Teever 2y ago

That depends on if they make use of drones to achieve their goals.

hello_moto 2y ago

When the leader starts shooting the people, they lost the country for good. The outcome is either they become a closed-autocratic/dictatorship country or the leader will be ousted super quick.