Are We Witnessing the Start of a Global Revolution?

[thomasglee]

An uprising in Tunisia led to the overthrow of the country’s 23-year long dictatorship of President Ben Ali. A new ‘transitional’ government was formed, but the protests continued demanding a totally new government without the relics of the previous tyranny. Protests in Algeria have continued for weeks, as rage mounts against rising food prices, corruption and state oppression. Protests in Jordan forced the King to call on the military to surround cities with tanks and set up checkpoints. Tens of thousands of protesters marched on Cairo demanding an end to the 30-year dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak. Thousands of activists, opposition leaders and students rallied in the capitol of Yemen against the corrupt dictatorship of President Saleh, in power since 1978. Saleh has been, with U.S. military assistance, attempting to crush a rebel movement in the north and a massive secessionist movement growing in the south, called the “Southern Movement.” Protests in Bolivia against rising food prices forced the populist government of Evo Morales to backtrack on plans to cut subsidies. Chile erupted in protests as demonstrators railed against rising fuel prices. Anti-government demonstrations broke out in Albania, resulting in the deaths of several protesters.

It seems as if the world is entering the beginnings of a new revolutionary era: the era of the ‘Global Political Awakening.’ While this ‘awakening’ is materializing in different regions, different nations and under different circumstances, it is being largely influenced by global conditions. The global domination by the major Western powers, principally the United States, over the past 65 years, and more broadly, centuries, is reaching a turning point. The people of the world are restless, resentful, and enraged. Change, it seems, is in the air. As the above quotes from Brzezinski indicate, this development on the world scene is the most radical and potentially dangerous threat to global power structures and empire. It is not a threat simply to the nations in which the protests arise or seek change, but perhaps to a greater degree, it is a threat to the imperial Western powers, international institutions, multinational corporations and banks that prop up, arm, support and profit from these oppressive regimes around the world. Thus, America and the West are faced with a monumental strategic challenge: what can be done to stem the Global Political Awakening? Zbigniew Brzezinski is one of the chief architects of American foreign policy, and arguably one of the intellectual pioneers of the system of globalization. Thus, his warnings about the 'Global Political Awakening' are directly in reference to its nature as a threat to the prevailing global hierarchy. As such, we must view the 'Awakening' as the greatest hope for humanity. Certainly, there will be mainy failures, problems, and regressions; but the 'Awakening' has begun, it is underway, and it cannot be so easily co-opted or controlled as many might assume.

Read the rest here....

[Lily]

Well, to put it bluntly, that has a lot to do with whether we can find it in ourselves to create one, and make it work. I think that we can, but it's a pretty idealistic goal.

I don't know what John's thoughts are about the possibility of an American youth-led mass Crisis-style social movement in which the economically disenfranchised Gen-Y protests the horribly failed policies of the previous generations, then replaces the political leadership and reverses the mistakes. I think it's much more plausible than most people realize, however, and once things get going something along those lines could change the political environment rapidly enough that opposing forces might not be able to formulate an effective response. But more importantly, I think if such a movement isn't created and sustained, we're on a sure-fire path to a global social and environmental collapse of epic proportions, so...I sure hope so.

Perhaps things are happening offstage to make a deus ex machina of this kind a little more plausible. Only time will tell, right?

[thomasglee]

Well, to put it bluntly, that has a lot to do with whether we can find it in ourselves to create one, and make it work. I think that we can, but it's a pretty idealistic goal.

I don't know what John's thoughts are about the possibility of an American youth-led mass Crisis-style social movement in which the economically disenfranchised Gen-Y protests the horribly failed policies of the previous generations, then replaces the political leadership and reverses the mistakes. I think it's much more plausible than most people realize, however, and once things get going something along those lines could change the political environment rapidly enough that opposing forces might not be able to formulate an effective response. But more importantly, I think if such a movement isn't created and sustained, we're on a sure-fire path to a global social and environmental collapse of epic proportions, so...I sure hope so.

Perhaps things are happening offstage to make a deus ex machina of this kind a little more plausible. Only time will tell, right?

It would be nice if your scenario could play out, but I think instead the elites will use their control over the markets, governments and industrial complex (gawd, I know that sounds really conspiracy theoretic) to squash any "uprisings" that do not fit their monetary/hegemonic ideals. War does not really affect the über-rich, and as such, many of them do not worry about it as we, the "small people" do. Just look at all the colour revolutions fomented by the likes of Soros and his ilk and think about consider how even though there were deaths in many of those movements, Soros gleefully takes pride in being a substantial force behind the movements.

[Lily]

Your concerns that the elite's planetary power grab will be unstoppable definitely have merit. However, I think you overestimate the stability of the current imperial hegemonic globalist edifice. If there's one thing people don't understand about empires, it's that they're stupid. In the past they could get away with this by using overwhelming force, but things are changing. All the guns and heavy metal in the world are worthless if the mind that employs them is paralyzed, fragmented, and confused.

In the past, revolutions in military affairs, driven by emerging technologies for employing force and innovative new ways of using and organizing it, have decisively changed the balance of power among states and peoples, and the same will happen this time around. For instance, despite its shaky finances, observers of the French monarchy before the Revolution might have said that it was extremely stable, because it controlled the largest, most modern armies in Europe, and was willing to use them to quell dissent. But as it happened, Napoleon's innovative use of fast-traveling infantry formations combined perfectly with the new egalitarian social structure that made them possible, and allowed a new form of social organization to arise, despite the putatively overwhelming force of the old order. Even though his state was eventually swallowed because of his strategic mistakes, the form of social order that he (along with George Washington!) midwifed into being eventually became the dominant form of state in Europe.

Similarly, Hitler's massive global conquests were made possible by new advancements in technology combined with radical new doctrines for employing the new weapons, along with new paradigm of social order designed to mobilize national resources for the rapid advancement and procurement of weapons technology. Hitler was destroyed, of course, (again because of his strategic mistakes) but this only happened after the other two most powerful states, and their clients, had adopted the twin innovations of blitzkreig-style mechanized war and a powerful system of military-industrial weapons cartels with influence in foreign policy. The working-out of the consequences of those military innovation created fundamentally new forms of social order all over the world.

In the same way, I think we'll see a dynamic where the progress of technology opens up undreamt-of possibilities for the waging of popular guerrilla resistance against authoritarian regimes, which will make possible new forms of order in human societies that are more just and sustainable than our current models. I won't go into the specifics of how this might work unless someone is interested, but suffice it to say that I've been studying the problem in some depth for a while now, and I think that ultimately it is solvable on a very short time scale, given a properly organized and intelligently led social movement.

People will be quite surprised, I think, to learn just how brittle our current authoritarian governments really are. It isn't necessary to win an arm-wrestling contest with the state; it's simply necessary to drum up popular resistance to the regime, paralyze the decision-making nodes, and parry such heavy-handed retaliatory strikes as the regime can get away with on camera until it falls to ever-increasing pressure from the disenfranchised masses. The last part is hard, but not an impossible task for the serious, prudent, and careful student of history, technology, and strategy.

In short, I think entrepreneurial "liberal" democracy can survive the current struggle against authoritarian technocracy, but only if we open ourselves up to as much knowledge and wisdom as we can gather from the remains of the centuries of man before our modern hubris destroys us, and only if we learn to work together intelligently. As someone who hopes that such a conflict won't be necessary, or won't be violent if it is necessary, I nonetheless think we'd better be thinking about how to bloody well win it if it does get ugly. At least a handful of us are willing to bet quite a bit that it can be done - say, the minor sum of our lives, fortunes, and sacred honor.

[thomasglee]

It's not so much that I overestimate the power of the empire, so to speak, as much as I am pessimistic and, perhaps, underestimate the will of the peoples. There are several reasons WHY the global elites with their desire to consolidate their power over the world do not need a large standing military or militaries to exert their control and the main reason is that they're effectively spreading their ideology while convincing the masses that's what they (the masses) want. They've also created, for the first time in history as far as I can tell, a global dependency. Most will never take up the challenge primarily because they do not know how to survive on their own. And I'm not just talking about "wilderness" survival. I mean survival in general. Most people have no clue how to truly take care of themselves nor think on their own. So many in the world now look toward government or governments as the solutions to their problems and for their information, the vast majority still turn on their talk boxes to hear and see what they're supposed to believe. Most that read the internet look for entertainment and rarely use it for what it is really useful for and that's unfiltered news and information. Sure, you have to be smart enough to filter through the crap, but there is a wealth of information on the web, but most will never find it as they're too busy using the internet to find porn, play games, read gossip or to carry over their partisan political bickering regarding which party is best; instead of using it as the truly useful tool that it has become. Not to slam this site, because I love it, but just look at how few participate in a site that requires truly critical thinking! It's amazing and speaks volumes.

I'm not taking my position to be argumentative. I've just come to my own conclusion that, as we learn here, we're in a generational cycle of doom and until this one plays out, nothing will improve. What is most worrisome about it is that in this cycle, the weapons that will potentially be used are the most devastating ever experienced throughout history. That does not bode well for mankind's future.

[Lily]

I share your pessimism. Apathy is a huge problem. But I think, to put it bluntly, that we can overcome it. Only time will tell, but I think humanity might just be clever enough to pull it off.

[inoka11]

I think we have been witnessing a Global REvolution form a long time now. but now we have seeing it in a bigger scale

[gerald]

I think we have been witnessing a Global REvolution form a long time now. but now we have seeing it in a bigger scale

Something, may be like this? --- for what it is worth --

from CNN Tech ---

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/26/tech/anon ... index.html

and the post ---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaPni5O2YyI

[John]

I think we have been witnessing a Global REvolution form a long time now. but now we have seeing it in a bigger scale

Something, may be like this? --- for what it is worth --

from CNN Tech ---

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/26/tech/anon ... index.html

and the post ---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaPni5O2YyI

Gerald, just for your information, I believe that inoka11 is spammer.
He's posted five messages, and after a few days he'll modify the
messages or his signature to point to some site that sells garbage. I
should delete his messages now, but I feel a moral obligation to wait
until he makes his next move.

[gerald]

I think we have been witnessing a Global REvolution form a long time now. but now we have seeing it in a bigger scale

Something, may be like this? --- for what it is worth --

from CNN Tech ---

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/26/tech/anon ... index.html

and the post ---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaPni5O2YyI

Gerald, just for your information, I believe that inoka11 is spammer.
He's posted five messages, and after a few days he'll modify the
messages or his signature to point to some site that sells garbage. I
should delete his messages now, but I feel a moral obligation to wait
until he makes his next move.

I guess we will see what happens, if you feel it needs to be deleted -- fine by me, I am sure you know more about this then I do.