My Historical Analysis on three events that caused lost of rights in USA

[Fallbreeze]

I'd agree with that. Just a question though. What would happen if the government just ignored its people? Just hypothetical.

[Rodri]

Ordinary people don't realise how much power they really have until they are prepared to use it. Governments have power because we allow them to have power. They may control the military but the soldiers are ordinary people too and if they are reminded of this in a non-violent way and reminded that they are pointing guns at their own country-men, perhaps even members of their own family, many times they will reject the orders of their officers and join the people in their cause.

In my opinion, many people in the world are upset and angry at this time but many still don't understand why or who is to blame. So first, education and public debate is vital and it must be completely open and truthful. Once enough ordinary people are convinced that things must be changed and a general consensus has been reached on what those changes might be, then real action can take place.

I will quote from an article here about the collapse of the Soviet Union and the events of August 1991. My source material is here for those who are interested in learning more.

Finally, the situation came to a head in August of 1991. In a last-ditch effort to save the Soviet Union, which was floundering under the impact of the political movements which had emerged since the implementation of Gorbachev’s glasnost, a group of “hard-line” Communists organized a coup d’etat. They kidnapped Gorbachev, and then, on August 19 of 1991, they announced on state television that Gorbachev was very ill and would no longer be able to govern. The country went into an uproar. Massive protests were staged in Moscow, Leningrad, and many of the other major cities of the Soviet Union. When the coup organizers tried to bring in the military to quell the protestors, the soldiers themselves rebelled, saying that they could not fire on their fellow countrymen. After three days of massive protest, the coup organizers surrendered, realizing that without the cooperation of the military, they did not have the power to overcome the power of the entire population of the country.

[jorbaud]

I'd agree with that. Just a question though. What would happen if the government just ignored its people? Just hypothetical.

It is the right and the duty of the citizens of the USA to overthrow the government if the government stops serving them.

[Fallbreeze]

It is the right and the duty of the citizens of the USA to overthrow the government if the government stops serving them.

I know this. That's why I made my question hypothetical. Plus, you do have to remember the overthrow would HAVE to be non-violent, because of 'treason' charges, even though our constitution requires a treason charge to be backed up by two witnesses to the 'overt' actions of such.

I guess I should clarify. If the normal non-violent protests are ignored by the government, would the people be right to persue other nonviolent, though unconventional means? Like, say, a massive recall of their representatives?

[jorbaud]

Like, say, a massive recall of their representatives?

I think the foundering fathers would want us not to actually overthrow the government but to change it by electing people with the same beliefs and views as we have. Which is what you are saying I believe.

[Rodri]

The founding fathers were revolutionaries and knew about the possibilities of corruption and abuses of power. I feel pretty confident that they would say that if the system is no longer working to benefit the people, then change the system any way you can until it does.

You have to remember the phrase "government of the people, for the people, by the people". That is what they were aiming to achieve.

There are many non-violent methods that have been used to overthrow or reform unrepresentative governments in the past, such as passive resistance, strikes and non-violent protests. Personally, I am not going to tell anyone what they should be doing. This is just a discusssion after all and most of what I am saying is information that is already out there if you care to go look for it. That is why I still believe proper education is the first priority, in my opinion.

___________________________________________

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is another example of a method of non-violent, creative resistance and advocacy for change. The events of 1990 in the soviet block inspired the German band Scorpion to write and record Winds of Change. They also released Russian and Spanish versions of the song. The song did not become a hit until after the events of August 1991 but it went on to inspire several more civil dissobedience events in former Soviet satellite nations that were still under the dominance of local hard-line Soviet leaders and brought democracy into most of those countries without a single shot being fired.

The song is a bit cheesy and the clip has none of the historic footage that was in the first video released at the time. But it does have a certain power to stir strong emotions in some of us who are old enough to remember that time and all that we also felt when we listened to this song then. Anyway, enjoy.

Scorpions - Winds of Change

[Moghedien]

Non violence does not always work. If you have exhausted all other means to regain your rights then it may be neccessary to take up arms against a tryannical governement. The founding fathers knew this and that is why we have a second admendment along with all arer other rights.

Some qoutes to think about by founding fathers.

"If tyranny and Oppression comes to this land it will be in the guise of fighting a foriegn enemy." -James Madison

"No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare." -james madison

"the means of defense against foriegn danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."

"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power tahn by violent and sudden usurpations."

[Fallbreeze]

I do remember those events, Rodri, and feel the same about the song.

And Mog, a violent overthrow is not without it's fair share of risks, too. Even though our constitution gave us the right to rebel against unjust government, think about what I said also with its part about treason. Also take into consideration all of the assassination attempts on US Presidents and Vice Presidents in history. You'd have a far better chance of totally and completely changing the government by mass recall and show of no confidence than an armed uprising.

At the same time...this may sound a bit sacreligeous, after doing that, maybe the constitution and the laws should be brought up for a debate on whether we should 'update' the documents for more current times. Don't shoot me, it's more of a thought!

[Conrad_Jalowski]

The American concept that the populace or citizenry possesses the right to overthrow or topple particular regimes that have become despotic was derived from John Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government which in turn originated from the French monarchomachs. The monarchomachs were originally French Huguenots who opposed autocracies or absolute monarchies as well as the doctrine of ultramontanism and later came to include tyrannicides in which it was a sacred duty of the citizenry to completely overthrow and dissolve unjust, immoderate and despotic regimes.

The concept of inalienable, sovereign and inviolable rights or laws that were not provided or guaranteed by the rules of men but by the Divine Will or Nature was eloquently expressed by Marcus Tullius Cicero. The concept that all men are created equal and possess a divine spark is Ciceronian. Marcus Tullius Cicero once stated that there exists a single divine and perpetual law that unites all the world and that this divine and natural law transcends all local governments, whether originating from the cities of Rome or Athens. This universal, indissoluble and encompassing law was expounded by the greatest orator and statesman of Antiquity - Marcus Tullius Cicero. The concept of a "brotherhood of man" was an incomplete classification of natural and sovereign rights that originated from the Pre-Socratic philosopher Heraclitus of Ephesus and the Stoic philosophers; however, the case for a universal law that transcended petty politics as well as national identities was compiled and eloquently expressed by Cicero. In particular, the Constitution of the United States is indebted to the Romans as it was infused with Ciceronian natural law and Roman representative government.

[Rodri]

Conrad, thank you for your contribution.
There is much of this historical underpinning that I was either unaware of or had forgotten about. I think it is important and enlightening to trace and understand the history of the discussion we are having.

We can see that these philosophies that are embodied in the American Constitution, the Declaration of Independance and The Bill of Rights are all underpinned by a foundation of philosophical and social discussion that reaches back to the very roots of our democratic societies of today.