4 ms·
Sorry, but you cannot and should not fight. The asymmetry in power is too great. The last thing you want to do is find yourself labelled as a "troublemaker" or
by w_t_payne 13y ago
Sorry, but you cannot and should not fight. The asymmetry in power is too great. The last thing you want to do is find yourself labelled as a "troublemaker" or (worse) as an "enemy". The state has an almost unlimited capacity to ruin the lives of those whom it targets. The best, safest thing for us all is to keep quiet, stay out of politics, and learn to think carefully about what we say or do before we say or do it. If you start to act aggressively, then you run the risk of putting yourself (and the entire community) in danger. I repeat again (for emphasis): Challenging the agencies is a sure-fire way to get yourself and those around you into a whole world of trouble. Do not do it. Do not even think about doing it:- just keep your head down and keep quiet - for all our sakes.
- PostOnce 13y agoThe only possible outcome of such behavior is a worsening situation. How is that defensible? Nothing risked, nothing gained.
- kunai 13y agoIF that's the risk it takes, so be it. Safety be damned; this is the welfare of my children's, your children's, and their children's, future. And our future too. We're going to be here quite a while.
- w_t_payne 13y agoYou are a fool and an idiot if you think that you can fight the agencies (and by extension the state) and win. 90% of winning is choosing your battles wisely - do not choose this one. You. Will. End. Up. Hurt.
- jaworrom 13y agoLast I checked, there is exponentially more citizens than government officials. Most military sides with the people. A few cowards would side with the government, but most would support their fellow citizens... the government isn't all that mighty when you consider this... I dearly hope such a standoff never has to occur, as I think there are better ways to solve these issues we have with our bloated government.
- w_t_payne 13y agoWell, the numerical advantage is not always as dramatic as you presuppose: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi). Also, your assumption that the entire remainder of the populace is "on side" is possibly a little optimistic. All the state has to do is ensure sufficient apathy to whittle those odds down to something that (with it's organizational, technological and financial advantage) is comfortably one-sided (to the advantage of the state).
- kunai 13y agoFirst of all, ad hominem never helped anyone. Second, I don't for a second expect to win. The point is not to win at all, it's to start something. I'm not the only one who believes so; there are plenty others who believe the same and are willing to risk imprisonment, scorn, or injury to advance rights (e.g. Aaron Swartz. If you wish to disagree you may). We are perhaps a little bit more free than we were in the '60s, but for the last 70 years, we have been limited by secret, corrupt government and a legislature that really sucks. Third, you say I should choose my battles wisely, yet in your original post you suggested I do nothing at all. How is that choosing a battle at all? I'm preaching peaceful protest, and you imply that we should sit by while everything falls to pieces. Do you want your kids to grow up in a world that is ruled, not led? Call me a conspirast, but it will be true if these conditions continue.
- antoinevg 13y agoI kept looking for the <sarcasm> tag… and well mate… all I can say is I'm deeply grateful not everyone felt the same as you in South Africa during the 80's.
- w_t_payne 13y agoYeah, well, sometimes you have to bury the <sarcasm> tag a bit if you want to goad people into responding...