I don't know enough about the situation over the pond to attempt to comment on it, but it appears that the US is at a crossroads.
The two primary political parties find themselves more and more disenfranchised with their voter-base by the day. Neither side is "winning" this ridiculous little war they are waging on each other. And neither side has a voter-base that is even remotely happy with their representatives. Most importantly.. neither side is making any headway in the struggles of our country. It's all one big cluster--blam!- of a stalemate.
One thing is clear.. we're all unhappy with the status quo.
But revolution is a terrible, last resort option for seeking the change in modern society. People don't really seem to grasp the quality of life changes that we would all suffer. That is.. of course.. unless people believe we could actually accomplish a peaceful revolution with a society that riots after basketball games.
But I digress..
I think the stage is set for a new direction. Perhaps a new "common sense" party. One group of people that finds the grey area of topics. One group that can campaign on the ideas they have for the country, rather than trashing what the past regime did. One group of people to act as a sort of mediator between the asses and elephants in congress. One group that can put forth a candidate for presidency that makes the everyday American torn on their choice.
I believe the stage is set. The only question is whether or not such a group will step forward.
English
-
Edited by RIP delta: 10/27/2013 6:19:44 PM[quote]But revolution is a terrible, last resort option for seeking the change in modern society. People don't really seem to grasp the quality of life changes that we would all suffer[/quote] Would you not agree, however, that the bottom X% (X coz no idea of actual stat and I'm watching TV so don't want to go and find out), the ones who own very little, who live day-to-day, have nothing to lose? If we take the pre-ObamaCare stats of 47m uninsured Americans, that would at least imply that 47m people in the USA can't afford to pay for healthcare insurance. Many more, on to of that, will only be able to have it through their job benefits, and therefore their health in directly tied to their employment. Revolution doesn't benefit those who have already benefited, true, but it is surely those who have caused the problems. What if the suggestion by Brand was not a 'Revolution' in terms of Egypt et al, but a revolution in the way we prioritise things - people over profit etc, a revolution in thinking, if you will? Then would the benefits not be felt by a significantly greater number of people than the current system allows for? This is also overlooking the advantages of a government that would focus more on preserving resources and the environment as opposed to the current 'ravenous' policies. beeteedubz, I'm just playing Devils Advocate here Also your last paragraph is good and you should feel good
-
If the revolution is a shift in overall priorities, count me in cuz I'm all for it.