Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-17-2020, 06:03 PM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,023

A Hypothetical: Viva la Revolución!


Assumptions

Emperors Trump and Obama have banded together to form the New American Republic, with each a co-equal ruler. This was done in response to the Mopery Crisis. The constitution has been suspended. All civil liberties have been suspended. Martial law has been declared. Elections have been suspended. It is revolution time!

- Assume that the state governments have fallen into line, and support the new regime.
- Assume a minimum of 60% support from the American public (if you need higher levels of supports for your argument, go for it). Won't somebody please think of the children!
- Police. Assume police forces have largely fallen into line. During the establishment of the regime, those police officers that would not obey orders have been fired (but not imprisoned or killed). Let's put that at 10%, but if you want to play with this number go ahead, just try to specify. I think this number is already too high though. Organizations like Oath Keepers and such have had a very hard time recruiting large numbers of police.
- Military, Leadership. A leadership purge has been completed to remove any disobedient officers and NCOs. Let's suppose that's about 50% of the current officer and NCO corps. Furthermore, we'll suppose that an additional 25% are left in the service but will initially reject any grossly illegal order (firing on civilians). The remaining 25% are fully loyal to the new regime.
- Military, Enlisted. 15% of the American military have resigned or been fired of them assume 2/3rds will actively join the resist. They were not able to leave with any vehicles, but perhaps some small amount of man portable equipment. 50% of the remaining forces will refuse a grossly illegal order. The remainder will follow the command of their leadership.
- Civilians. Assume 40% of the American public own a firearm, giving roughly 120,000,000 firearm owners. Some percentage will support the regime, some percentage will resist and some percentage will sit it out. You can specify the percentages you're assuming; however, the sum or support the regime and sit it out must equal at least 60% (since 60% of Americans support the regime). In other words, at best, the resistance can count on 48,000,000 civilians revolutionaries.

I think this is about a good a scenario as you can hope for. Again, if somebody wants to make an argument that requires a modification to these numbers, then of course feel free, but the adjustment should be specified (ideally with some justification).

The Debate

Goal: Overthrow the government and restore democracy! (this is all hypothetical NSA, don't get your servers in a twist)

- You should try to win with the lowest number of revolutionaries possible. If you need all 48,000,000 to win, then this is a pretty weak win since it is vastly unlikely.
- You cannot assume movie-level incompetence from the regime. Pro-regime police and military forces will be about as competent as they are in the real world.
- Explicit violence against civilians is avoided by the regime initially; however, they will escalate if needed. The regime prefers to simply have people arrested, branded a moper and imprisoned.
  #2  
Old 01-17-2020, 06:44 PM
Max S. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 2,493
Are you making a board game or something?

Realistically if I grant that the incumbent government successfully and peacefully reorganizes itself into an autocracy, retaining the majority of military/police/civilian support, it is not at all given that all of the dissenters coalesce into a resistance movement or even that a significant resistance movement appears at all.

What we are hoping for is that the leadership purge results in a largely intact network of exiles (ETA: and an incompetent remainder government which quickly loses its public support). But don't you think the new autocracy will make it a priority to disrupt revolutionary communications? I need to know how much the rank and file of the autocratic government will push down on privacy.

There's also the question of how the revolution will succeed. Are we looking to win by actually defeating the government in military terms? Impossible without significant foreign intervention. There might be a pathway if our goal is to turn the tide of public opinion, but that only works so long as public opinion remains accessible - is the government changing censorship laws as we know them now? Otherwise you're looking at a righteous guerrilla movement and possibly an assassination attempt.

~Max

Last edited by Max S.; 01-17-2020 at 06:45 PM.
  #3  
Old 01-17-2020, 06:55 PM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max S. View Post
Are you making a board game or something?

Realistically if I grant that the incumbent government successfully and peacefully reorganizes itself into an autocracy, retaining the majority of military/police/civilian support, it is not at all given that all of the dissenters coalesce into a resistance movement or even that a significant resistance movement appears at all.

What we are hoping for is that the leadership purge results in a largely intact network of exiles (ETA: and an incompetent remainder government which quickly loses its public support). But don't you think the new autocracy will make it a priority to disrupt revolutionary communications? I need to know how much the rank and file of the autocratic government will push down on privacy.

There's also the question of how the revolution will succeed. Are we looking to win by actually defeating the government in military terms? Impossible without significant foreign intervention. There might be a pathway if our goal is to turn the tide of public opinion, but that only works so long as public opinion remains accessible - is the government changing censorship laws as we know them now? Otherwise you're looking at a righteous guerrilla movement and possibly an assassination attempt.

~Max
I'm leaving it open-ended as much as possible. I think that keeps it more fun and interesting. If I specify too much, then it kind of railroads the conversation.

Trying to sway the populace might be difficult. They're legitimately concerned about the crisis, and they feel that only the new regime can keep them safe.

Censorship. Hmmm. Let's say that independent journalism still exists, but only because they're pro-regime. Any stories must be government-sanctioned. There's also a new state news broadcast. Internet is controlled similar to the Great Firewall in China; however, the resistance can get some messages out via the internet, but it is risky. The government might be watching.

And no, I'm not building a board game. I like learning about how other people think. What is there point of view on various issues. It broadens my own horizons even when I don't agree with them. I don't think that an armed uprising in the USA can win against a fairly intact military and police force, with a fair amount of popular support. So, I'm interested if somebody can provide a realistic scenario where they could win.
  #4  
Old 01-17-2020, 07:17 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,066
How do dictatorships get overthrown in the real world?
  • An external military overthrows the regime
  • Mass protest and civil disobedience
  • Domestic armed insurrection
  • Foreign nations use economic and diplomatic pressure on the nation to restore democracy
  • An internal power struggle among the powers that be leads to a reformist leader (Gorbachev, Spain after Franco died, etc)
  • Domestic military overthrows the government (probably just creating another dictatorship though)

I'm sure there are other factors, but those seem to be the major ones.

The issue is I don't see the American public supporting a Trump-Obama dictatorship. Trump's supporters hate Obama and Obama's supporters won't like a dictatorship run by Trump. So nobody will really be happy.

If 60%+ of the public are ok with this dictatorship I doubt it gets overthrown.

What would work is just what was done in Vietnam, Iraq & Afghanistan. Bleeding the government dry with IEDs, ambush attacks, etc. until they get sick and tired of trying to control the population and give up. I don't think the US government has the stomach to deal with all out war. You'd only need a few thousand dedicated revolutionaries to constantly do these things and keep the system upset.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 01-17-2020 at 07:18 PM.
  #5  
Old 01-17-2020, 07:20 PM
Max S. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 2,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
Trying to sway the populace might be difficult. They're legitimately concerned about the crisis, and they feel that only the new regime can keep them safe.

Censorship. Hmmm. Let's say that independent journalism still exists, but only because they're pro-regime. Any stories must be government-sanctioned. There's also a new state news broadcast. Internet is controlled similar to the Great Firewall in China; however, the resistance can get some messages out via the internet, but it is risky. The government might be watching.
Well, you've made it quite difficult because there is no obvious base of revolutionary power. This isn't a civil war scenario, because you haven't given the revolutionaries an obvious or even plausible region of power. At best we have a bunch of bigwig exiles in and around D.C. but if the new dictators didn't have a strong grip over D.C., we wouldn't be in this situation would we?

Barring regional power structures you have cell organization, incognito people with secret communications. But you can't use the secret communications to sway public opinion because that would bring the government down on you and ruin all the fun. So I see a stall game, with limited guerrilla operations here and there. The leadership purge hopefully cripples the new government's efficiency, and a couple sabotages from ex-leaders means the revolution can try to prevent the government from satisfying the people's needs. Let discontent foster nationwide, and hope the people themselves change the system. If necessary, take out key government officials but realize that this can backfire if they are made into martyrs.

The endgame would be a situation where you have multiple important people who are secret revolutionaries. A sort of cabal embedded deep in the authoritarian state, plus popular discontent with the status quo. Then we plan a coup. Stage a false-flag operation to distract the military, or turn the military to your side, then execute the coup and resist the temptation to hold on to power.

The major problem here is that at no point is the revolution itself democratic. In order to have democracy people have to be free to get together, but the circumstances do not allow for such an outfit. So we would have a hard time dealing with that inherent hypocrisy.

~Max

Last edited by Max S.; 01-17-2020 at 07:23 PM.
  #6  
Old 01-17-2020, 07:59 PM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
The issue is I don't see the American public supporting a Trump-Obama dictatorship. Trump's supporters hate Obama and Obama's supporters won't like a dictatorship run by Trump. So nobody will really be happy.
That was meant to be a joke. I'm trying to keep the underlying "regime" outside of the real world.
  #7  
Old 01-17-2020, 08:03 PM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max S. View Post
Well, you've made it quite difficult because there is no obvious base of revolutionary power. This isn't a civil war scenario, because you haven't given the revolutionaries an obvious or even plausible region of power. At best we have a bunch of bigwig exiles in and around D.C. but if the new dictators didn't have a strong grip over D.C., we wouldn't be in this situation would we?

Barring regional power structures you have cell organization, incognito people with secret communications. But you can't use the secret communications to sway public opinion because that would bring the government down on you and ruin all the fun. So I see a stall game, with limited guerrilla operations here and there. The leadership purge hopefully cripples the new government's efficiency, and a couple sabotages from ex-leaders means the revolution can try to prevent the government from satisfying the people's needs. Let discontent foster nationwide, and hope the people themselves change the system. If necessary, take out key government officials but realize that this can backfire if they are made into martyrs.

The endgame would be a situation where you have multiple important people who are secret revolutionaries. A sort of cabal embedded deep in the authoritarian state, plus popular discontent with the status quo. Then we plan a coup. Stage a false-flag operation to distract the military, or turn the military to your side, then execute the coup and resist the temptation to hold on to power.

The major problem here is that at no point is the revolution itself democratic. In order to have democracy people have to be free to get together, but the circumstances do not allow for such an outfit. So we would have a hard time dealing with that inherent hypocrisy.

~Max
You don't think given the scenario I've outlined with 48,000,000 revolutionaries they cannot win? Interesting. I thought I was being too generous.
  #8  
Old 01-17-2020, 08:07 PM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
What would work is just what was done in Vietnam, Iraq & Afghanistan. Bleeding the government dry with IEDs, ambush attacks, etc. until they get sick and tired of trying to control the population and give up. I don't think the US government has the stomach to deal with all out war. You'd only need a few thousand dedicated revolutionaries to constantly do these things and keep the system upset.
The current US government has no stomach for it. I'm not so sure a tyrannical US government would care so much. I've the regime the slight edge in terms of popular support (feel free to change it if you like, I'm interested in scenarios where the revolutionaries would win). I think the problem with going the route your proposing is you walk into the idea of the revolutionaries being branded terrorists. Every dead civilian caught up in an IED creates more sympathy for the regime.

Also, a few thousand? I'm not so sure. I think the police and military wouldn't have too much trouble starting to round up such cells. Small terrorist cells in the USA have not fared so well in the real world. The highway snipers, the Boston bombers, etc. all were rounded up in fairly short order.
  #9  
Old 01-17-2020, 08:58 PM
Oakminster is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Surefall Glade, Antonica
Posts: 19,276
I see more possibilities with some form of secession in this scenario. One or more regions could, in theory, resist federal authority and establish regional autonomy without necessarily seeking to run the entire country.
__________________
"Yes, but that's because you're a wild human, not a tame human. The likes of you would have to be kept in a zoo, and the keepers would be very careful to never put their tentacles inside the bars"--Lemur866 describing Oak, 11/13/09
Molon labe--Leonidas I
  #10  
Old 01-17-2020, 09:23 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max S. View Post
Are you making a board game or something?

Realistically if I grant that the incumbent government successfully and peacefully reorganizes itself into an autocracy, retaining the majority of military/police/civilian support, it is not at all given that all of the dissenters coalesce into a resistance movement or even that a significant resistance movement appears at all.

What we are hoping for is that the leadership purge results in a largely intact network of exiles (ETA: and an incompetent remainder government which quickly loses its public support). But don't you think the new autocracy will make it a priority to disrupt revolutionary communications? I need to know how much the rank and file of the autocratic government will push down on privacy.

There's also the question of how the revolution will succeed. Are we looking to win by actually defeating the government in military terms? Impossible without significant foreign intervention. There might be a pathway if our goal is to turn the tide of public opinion, but that only works so long as public opinion remains accessible - is the government changing censorship laws as we know them now? Otherwise you're looking at a righteous guerrilla movement and possibly an assassination attempt.

~Max
Terrorism, as well.

For as much as people blame the Middle East and Islam for terrorism, it was the Christians in Ireland who developed most of the techniques and continued to make a living after the Irish Republic broke off by traveling to the Middle East to act as teachers and consultants.

Note the part where they won against the English.

Last edited by Sage Rat; 01-17-2020 at 09:24 PM.
  #11  
Old 01-18-2020, 12:35 AM
RioRico is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 1,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
Assumptions

Emperors Trump and Obama have banded together...
I stopped right there. Substitute any other celeb names and maybe this is fanfic of the lowest order. Emperors Kennedy & Nixon, or Spock & Khan, or Elvis & Prince. Give them arbitrary superpowers and vulnerabilities. Follow a Joseph Campbell script. Be sure to keep the merchandising rights. Look, a glowing dagger, only $999.99!

We need a sexy princess who's somebody's sister; unresolved Freudian kinks; warrior priests wielding immense but unstable power; cute clever sidekicks; glowering enemy forces; odd sound effects; and an obvious moral resolution, but with cliffhangers.

Visualize the end first. Is it peace and joy across the land, or general devastation, or a lusty free-for-all, or what? Now pick your players and the general setup. Work back from your finale to the necessary start. Be sure to include lots of sex so reader attention doesn't lag. Bad guys do circle-jerks; good guys do daisy-chains.

Politics can be whatever. Contrast the noble Nazis with slimy Social Justice Warriors for an incel audience, or vice-versa for normal people. Omit incest if you're going to post on Amazon.
  #12  
Old 01-18-2020, 02:00 AM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,474
Is this dictatorship trying to run the economy? Or are they just focused on Mopery and are pretty much leaving the economy as it is, markets and internet and all?
  #13  
Old 01-18-2020, 05:35 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,745
Propaganda channels would be very important. In real-world coups, the new regime targeted key radio stations early on. But what about today's distributed news? Would MSNBC buildings be bombed? Paratroopers flown into Facebook HQ? I'm not trying to be silly — these measures might be worth many battalions of infantry.

Actual combat would involve groups of "ordinary Americans" versus groups of "ordinary Americans." That some of these Americans would be in the U.S. military is a red herring — the Army will not support a dictatorship unless there is also public support, at least among military-minded citizens.

The U.S.'s regions are fairly heterogeneous: there are whites, blacks and browns almost everywhere; both leftists and rightists almost everywhere. Rather than Oakland marching against Berkeley, expect to see rioting (e.g. black -vs- white fighting) in neighborhoods throughout the land. Some of the rioters would be armed with AR-15's, but those using only their fists would also be troublesome. Support for government — any government — would grow, just in hope that government could restore civil order.

TL;DR: The percent of citizens joining riots who possess assault weapons might not be a key parameter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
That was meant to be a joke. I'm trying to keep the underlying "regime" outside of the real world.
It's rather hard to imagine the real-world parameters of a scenario like you describe. Knowing that yours were a "joke" makes consideration even more difficult.

Last edited by septimus; 01-18-2020 at 05:37 AM.
  #14  
Old 01-18-2020, 09:46 AM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
It's rather hard to imagine the real-world parameters of a scenario like you describe. Knowing that yours were a "joke" makes consideration even more difficult.
Then don't consider it. The point isn't how the regime took power (other than it has fair popular support), it is that a regime has taken control; i.e., don't fight the whites. I choose Trump-Obama to keep it politically neutral, while hopefully also eliciting a chuckle at the absurdity of those two working together.
  #15  
Old 01-18-2020, 09:53 AM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
I stopped right there. Substitute any other celeb names and maybe this is fanfic of the lowest order. Emperors Kennedy & Nixon, or Spock & Khan, or Elvis & Prince. Give them arbitrary superpowers and vulnerabilities. Follow a Joseph Campbell script. Be sure to keep the merchandising rights. Look, a glowing dagger, only $999.99!

We need a sexy princess who's somebody's sister; unresolved Freudian kinks; warrior priests wielding immense but unstable power; cute clever sidekicks; glowering enemy forces; odd sound effects; and an obvious moral resolution, but with cliffhangers.

Visualize the end first. Is it peace and joy across the land, or general devastation, or a lusty free-for-all, or what? Now pick your players and the general setup. Work back from your finale to the necessary start. Be sure to include lots of sex so reader attention doesn't lag. Bad guys do circle-jerks; good guys do daisy-chains.

Politics can be whatever. Contrast the noble Nazis with slimy Social Justice Warriors for an incel audience, or vice-versa for normal people. Omit incest if you're going to post on Amazon.
My last job in the military was as a planning officer. One of my jobs was to write exercise scenarios that would be relevant to our likely operational tasks as a combat brigade. If I wanted to I could write a very dry but realistic scenario. It would probably be about 20 pages long filled with an incredible amount of detail. But I don't think it would be as much fun (plus it would take me a LOT longer so that's right out).

My participation on this board is predicated on it being fun. We're not actually fixing anything here. The impact of these discussions is very small, so in my view, they should be fun and amusing and not taken too seriously (but it should be conducted with sincerity). I take this more as a bunch of friends sitting around the table and having a friendly argument/discussion.

In any case, I like a lot of your ideas, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Last edited by BeepKillBeep; 01-18-2020 at 09:56 AM.
  #16  
Old 01-18-2020, 09:56 AM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Is this dictatorship trying to run the economy? Or are they just focused on Mopery and are pretty much leaving the economy as it is, markets and internet and all?
It is mainly up to you. Feel free to specify whether it is or is not.

Although I think the regime has suspended the constitution, instituted martial law, etc, towards dealing with The Crisis, and they're keeping themselves out of other aspects so as to keep popular support. From a practical perspective, I believe that a minimalist scenario is best in this case so that it more accurately reflects the real world, so I would tend towards saying that the economy and such is allowed to continue so long as it does not interfere with the regime.

Probably, at least some controls would be needed on the internet to keep people from criticizing the regime.
  #17  
Old 01-18-2020, 10:00 AM
Horatius is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
Also, a few thousand? I'm not so sure. I think the police and military wouldn't have too much trouble starting to round up such cells. Small terrorist cells in the USA have not fared so well in the real world. The highway snipers, the Boston bombers, etc. all were rounded up in fairly short order.


But you're ignoring factors that would make these guys much better than the average terrorists we have seen in the real world. For starters, you've got a base of purged military officers and enlisted men to recruit from. Skill-wise, these guys will be far superior to the sorts of loners and losers who have been drifting into terrorism in the US since 9/11.

And one thing the military is good at is passing on skills to new recruits, so even those recruited from the civilian population would tend to be better than what we typically see as terrorists.

Secondly, they'd have a much better network of supporters. With 40% of the population acting as potential safe houses, and sources of food, arms, ammunition and the like, they'd have far more logistical support than any real terror cell has ever had. A few people on staff at a few Walmart and CostCo stores in every state, and lots of goods could "fall off a truck" and into their hands.

It would still be a massive up-hill battle, and would require serious discipline to avoid attacks that will unify the opposition population around the government, but it could be done.
  #18  
Old 01-18-2020, 10:21 AM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
But you're ignoring factors that would make these guys much better than the average terrorists we have seen in the real world. For starters, you've got a base of purged military officers and enlisted men to recruit from. Skill-wise, these guys will be far superior to the sorts of loners and losers who have been drifting into terrorism in the US since 9/11.

And one thing the military is good at is passing on skills to new recruits, so even those recruited from the civilian population would tend to be better than what we typically see as terrorists.

Secondly, they'd have a much better network of supporters. With 40% of the population acting as potential safe houses, and sources of food, arms, ammunition and the like, they'd have far more logistical support than any real terror cell has ever had. A few people on staff at a few Walmart and CostCo stores in every state, and lots of goods could "fall off a truck" and into their hands.

It would still be a massive up-hill battle, and would require serious discipline to avoid attacks that will unify the opposition population around the government, but it could be done.
I'm not ignoring anything. I've kept it very open-ended so that people can bring up points like you just have. These are clearly factors.

The Taliban had significant popular support in Afghanistan. And that didn't really help them that much. I think it can be easy to underestimate just how effective the police and military could be at sweeping up freedom fighters/terrorists especially with little niceties like innocent until proven guilty, right to remain silent, etc. are off the table.

Of course, if the regime is too violent and abusive, they probably lose some popular support. We see that in the Middle East that violent strikes create terrorists. Go figure.

So it is an interesting balance.

The thing is that sooner or later the revolutionaries are going to have to either fight or convince the military/police to switch sides. I don't think they can win the long game otherwise. I think they lose a battle of attrition. If the government doesn't care about casualties, and I don't see why a tyrannical government would, then all the IEDs aren't going to sweep them from power.
  #19  
Old 01-18-2020, 11:17 AM
JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 16,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
I choose Trump-Obama to keep it politically neutral, while hopefully also eliciting a chuckle at the absurdity of those two working together.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
It is mainly up to you. Feel free to specify whether it is or is not.

Although I think the regime has suspended the constitution, instituted martial law, etc, towards dealing with The Crisis, and they're keeping themselves out of other aspects so as to keep popular support. From a practical perspective, I believe that a minimalist scenario is best in this case so that it more accurately reflects the real world, so I would tend towards saying that the economy and such is allowed to continue so long as it does not interfere with the regime.
Which in a way makes the absurd cabal a good choice: The Crisis, whatever it is, is such that in an effort to prevent a general collapse that would ruin a lot of people economically, two leaders who each is popular and charismatic among a large segment of their respective faction whip up their emotional support from that faction to coalesce in a coalition to "do what it takes" to save what behind the mask is their real constituents' interest: that there continues to be food in the supermarket and cars at the dealership, the power plants continue to generate, the currency doesn't hyperinflate and, most importantly, investment bankers, corporate CEOs and cultural celebrities don't end up on the run from former middle class and working families hunting them for food.

Under that circumstance indeed one could see a 60+% level of support, including a huge share of those whose position will be more along the lines of "well, if there's a war my family will freeze/starve, I'd rather not have it".

A frontal revolution/civil war would be unlikely, instead devolving into something more like The Troubles, and then the matter would become, whether when after some time of that, Big Capital tells the new ruling cabal "OK you stopped the crash ten years ago, thank you, but now we need to cut our losses and make concessions", the ruling cabal will tell Big Capital "guess what, we no longer work for you".

Last edited by JRDelirious; 01-18-2020 at 11:20 AM.
  #20  
Old 01-18-2020, 01:29 PM
BeepKillBeep is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRDelirious View Post
Which in a way makes the absurd cabal a good choice: The Crisis, whatever it is, is such that in an effort to prevent a general collapse that would ruin a lot of people economically, two leaders who each is popular and charismatic among a large segment of their respective faction whip up their emotional support from that faction to coalesce in a coalition to "do what it takes" to save what behind the mask is their real constituents' interest: that there continues to be food in the supermarket and cars at the dealership, the power plants continue to generate, the currency doesn't hyperinflate and, most importantly, investment bankers, corporate CEOs and cultural celebrities don't end up on the run from former middle class and working families hunting them for food.

Under that circumstance indeed one could see a 60+% level of support, including a huge share of those whose position will be more along the lines of "well, if there's a war my family will freeze/starve, I'd rather not have it".

A frontal revolution/civil war would be unlikely, instead devolving into something more like The Troubles, and then the matter would become, whether when after some time of that, Big Capital tells the new ruling cabal "OK you stopped the crash ten years ago, thank you, but now we need to cut our losses and make concessions", the ruling cabal will tell Big Capital "guess what, we no longer work for you".
I'm glad somebody appreciates the New American Republic. Soooooooo know of any Mopery sympathizers?
  #21  
Old 01-18-2020, 08:59 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 11,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
Goal: Overthrow the government and restore democracy! (this is all hypothetical NSA, don't get your servers in a twist)
What if I can't convince people that democracy is necessary or even the most viable and effective alternative form of government?

People won't risk their lives for freedom and democracy; they'll risk their lives if they think that the government is going to ruin their standard of living and that they won't be able to do anything about it.
  #22  
Old 01-19-2020, 12:49 AM
RioRico is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 1,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
In any case, I like a lot of your ideas, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
I haven't posted any fresh smut lately. I should work on that. Problem with political smut is it's usually a boner-killer. Anything with current players, ick, ewww... Some can be merrily parodied, like Trish Nixon holding up a French tickler in her father's image and gasping, "Ooh, it's gooey!" But set here-and-now, it would only seem like reporting.

A 2020+ revolution story will require nerdy hackers, Slavic zillionaires, coke-smuggling submarines, balloon-launched amateur satellite zappers, wired killer dolphins, deep-fake political vids, sexual abuse by radioactive octopi, sabotage at a Hormel packing plant, and IQ-enhanced gibbons. Then a cliffhanger ending, with an orgy hinted. But it turns out to all be the wet-dream of a conservative SCOTUS justice and is thus a tragedy. Cue the weepy strings. Oh no, they're explosive!

Next: Naked patriots on skateboards ravage the demon-haunted landscape. Zoom in for details.
  #23  
Old 01-20-2020, 09:41 AM
Max S. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 2,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepKillBeep View Post
You don't think given the scenario I've outlined with 48,000,000 revolutionaries they cannot win? Interesting. I thought I was being too generous.
Those 48 million people are spread out across about 3.5 million square miles. And they aren't all revolutionaries, those are the 16% of the population that are unsympathetic to the government and own firearms. Further, these people do not have any clear means of communicating, much less organizing into a formal resistance movement.

~Max
  #24  
Old 01-21-2020, 01:01 PM
Isosleepy's Avatar
Isosleepy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,069
It depends on motivation. If the revolutionaries are both motivated to the point of willing to give their lives, and ruthless to the level of Beria, it can be done, I think.
So add to the scenario the patently unacceptable propensity of the new government and any who support it to, say, tap the brakes before they enter a tunnel:
The revolutionaries threaten the lives of loved ones of low- and mid-level government. Everything from chiefs of police, to sanitation supervisors, to air traffic controllers, and also key private individuals, like truck dispatchers, power-plant maintenance coordinators etc. Threats are individual and specific: quit your job by Friday, or your wife/kid/mom/pet gets it. Follow through on non-compliance. First in a random area of the US as proof of concept, then in whatever area those whom you seek to pressure into making changes live and work.
When two kids fight over a toy, the kid least concerned with breaking the toy ends up with it. I reckon the same goes for nation-states.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:49 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017