Well, one of those things might be true.
B-but the whole room is full of shit, there MUST be a pony in here SOMEWHERE!!! 
Look! Everyone else agrees with me!
Grow the fuck up and stop counting your “likes”. This isn’t a popularity contest.
FTW!
I don’t know if they agree with me, but they correctly interpreted my post. You didn’t. You consistently misinterpret my posts, and you’re just about the only one (aside from a lying troll or two). Counting up whether people understand my intent or not is the best way to determine if my post was written in a way that readers will understand. Unless you have another suggestion?
Was Robin Hood the bad guy in your childhood?
The problem comes from when the wealthy and powerful control the law, they control what recourse you could have.
At a certain point, yeah, it needs to be pointed out that we do outnumber them significantly, and that money and power only protect you so far.
How do you go about it if they control all the ways to go about it.
No, public beheadings are a sign of a failed socio-economic policy.
I do actually. I think many people here agree with your sometimes extreme left wing views. Which is fine. I agree with some of them as well. When I don’t, I try to explain to you why I find them problematic. You seem to be offended when I do and prefer to think it’s because I misunderstand you rather than disagree with you. Not sure how to help you with that except to suggest to you to take me at my word.
I’m not at all offended or even bothered when you disagree. I’m bothered when you consistently misinterpret what I said. My frustration with you is your consistent misinterpretation, and misrepresentation, of my posts.
I’ve created a new Trolls R Us thread since this one is clearly done.
Very well then. Come the revolution, I hope we’re all on the right side of the wall.
The trick to being rich and keeping anyone from coming for your money is to get the people to fight eachother.
Toss a sandwich to a half dozen starving people, and they will fight eachother for that sandwich, rather than you for putting them in that position.
People are given something to hate, and that is progressives. They don’t hate the policies, they don’t even know the policies. Most of the time, you ask about specific policies, and they will agree that those sound good. But, once you put a D in front of the name on the bill, people hate it, because they have been taught and conditioned to hate progressives by the very people that are actually hurting them.
No, they come kill you and take your stuff because they are starving, and you have food. We have lots of ways of making sure that no one in the US actually starves, even if they may be quite miserable in many other ways. You know why? It’s not because we care about them, it’s because starving people will come kill you for your food.
iiandyiiii is not signallying to them that there are circumstances under which is’t okay to kill those who have amassed greater wealth and power, he is warning you that there are times when people will kill those who are more fortunate. That they will start with people like us, rather than those who are most fortunate, is actually one of the features that protects the wealthy and powerful. You will feel the fear of being killed for what you posses long before the wealthy and powerful do, and all iiandyiiii is saying is that it would be nice if the wealthy and powerful shared in that fear, rather than being immune to it.
Be a real shame if someone quoted this as showing your support for a revolution that includes putting people ‘up against the wall’.
I appended the title of this one.
Very well then. I will consider this to be the more generous and insightful explanation of his position.
You just described our justice system.
But, to be serious, all of civilization ultimately boils down to violence. We behave “civilly” towards eachother because we know that if we do not, then people will come and be violent towards us. We dress it up, and the more layers we have before violence is resorted to, the more “civilized” we are, but ultimately, that’s what it all comes down to.
It is not an extreme position to recognize this.
Before democracy, if the leaders feared the people, it was a fear of an uprising and execution of the leaders. Then they had the great idea of implementing a democracy, where we can voice out displeasure with a ruler a bit more peacefully.
The wealthy do not have such an outlet. We cannot decide that we no longer want them to be bribing politicians to let them break the rules, we cannot decide that we no longer want them to fund propaganda that turns a people against itself.
We don’t get a vote on who is wealthy and powerful, so they operate under the same rules as rulers did before we could vote them out.
The point is that the wealthy and powerful should want to change things for the better for the people before things get to the point of a violent overthrow, and they should fear allowing things to get to that point.
I’ll probably be a brick in that wall.
I’m aware and agree with the view that civility and the social contract is a thin veneer of what lies beneath. That is why I am sensitive to suggestions that would permit the lifting of that veil and encourage violence. We’ve just witnessed how easy it is to create that kind of mob frenzy. It behooves us to learn from that experience.
Keeps on giving!
I will have a very different visceral reaction between people storming the Capitol, and people storming the country club.
In fact, during the whole “occupy wall street” debacle, I was trying to get some momentum behind “occupy golf courses.” I saw that less than a block from where OWS demonstrations were being held in Cincinnati, there was a bus line that let out right next to the gated community that Boehner lived in. I thought it would be quite a different message if they went and occupied and protested on the golf course in his backyard than in the streets blocking traffic and businesses.
Unfortunately, that didn’t go anywhere.
I feel like you wouldn’t.
There’s always this risk …
