Riches and power somehow seem to exempt those affiliated with the murders, rape and violence that the Epstein files have shed some light on. In 1917, lead by the brave women of Petrograd, the Russian Revolution removed the tsar from his throne and in 1789 the French Revolution overthrew the king, albeit not the aristocracy. Why are there no mass arrests targeting the child murdering, sister raping, oppressive Epstein elite that deserve nothing less than to rot in a prison cell for the rest of their lives? Obviously, the police and military exist only to uphold laws that serve this very elite, which occasionally and incidentally happen to put a bandage on people’s sufferinft without curing the ailment called capitalism…

  • NotEasyBeingGreen@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    Political revolutions usually involve a wealthy class being kept away from political power, combined with a particularly unpopular and stupid absolute ruler.

    In the US, the wealthy are the political class, and while Trump is stupid and unpopular he has only been in power a year. Most people think he will be gone in 3 more years, and even if he jettisons the Constitution and stays in as President, he is old and unhealthy.

  • CrackedLinuxISO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    Both revolutions came about in no small part due to terrible winter conditions.

    France had a terrible harvest in 1788 followed by a brutal winter where starving families had to choose between buying expensive bread or firewood.

    St Petersburg in winter of 1917 was miserably cold, and city dwellers queued for hours in outdoor bread lines while much of the available food was sent to war.

    It’s not enough that people hate a government. If they still have faith that the system can work for them (“Just one new finance minister, and France will be saved”, “If we can get rid of that damned Rasputin, the Tsar will wake up and hear our cries”) they will give it a chance. Mass starvation has a way of breaking such faith, but it’s obviously not the only thing that can.

    In the US, there’s very much a mood among the anti-MAGA crowd that an election can still fix things.

    • pfried@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      In the US, there’s very much a mood among the anti-MAGA crowd that an election can still fix things.

      More to the point, if an election can’t fix things because the voters are still MAGA, the new government installed by the majority will be the same as the old.

      Revolutions don’t make sense in a democracy, so until voting is stopped or the results of the vote are ignored (like if Trump had been successful on January 6), convincing voters to vote a particular way is the only surefire solution.

  • jobbies@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    There’s something going on with the American people. They acknowledge that what’s going on isn’t right and that something needs to change. However, besides a few (admittedly well-attended) protests and writing letters to their representatives, they are not willing to do anything else.

    If you question them about it, they’ll give you excuse after excuse. I’ve got to work. Government surveillance is too pervasive to allow us to organise. Military will wipe us out. I’ve heard it all.

  • Asfalttikyntaja@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    Bc we have made ourselves slaves of the capitalism. All of us have so much debt that we can’t rebel anymore. Those people in the past didn’t have anything, so there wasn’t much to lose. We all want to have everything nice, a beautiful house, a large automobil, a beautiful wife, a better iphone or something, regardless of do we have money to it. Revolution doesn’t fit in the our life. We are doomed to fail and die for the billionaires. Let that sink in.

    • BromSwolligans@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      We have so much debt but also all the police forces have become hyper militarized and laden with the left-over military hardware of the last 30 years of American warfare.

  • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    Need something to replace it though that isn’t worse. In France you got the reign of terror followed by Napoleon. In Russia you got Lenin then Stalin. Germany got the Weimar gov after ww1 but it was too weak to survive.

    • durinn@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      I see your point, just like the other gentleperson’s with the same rhetoric, but this just paves the way for apologetic capitulation. We need to address the immediate evil. What happens thereafter is another topic entirely.

  • Deestan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    Because the reasons you have for not actively effecting this change apply to everyone else as well.

    • durinn@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      Yes. And inaction is compliance. I recall now, that this is why I left politics years ago: I’m too comfortable, too lazy, not affected enough to care. The double standard within me is… infuriating.

  • reksas@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    good start would be openly calling for it, in such way media cant stay silent about it either

  • AmidFuror@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    You have your answer already. Instead of asking why others haven’t done it, ask yourself why you haven’t done it.

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    Its not needed. The elections will swing back and people and the politicans are hungry for reform. Things are bad in the US but day to day is still the same for the average person. Conditions would need to get much much worse for people to consider that.

  • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    The military today is able to kill nearly the entire population within days. That’s pretty much it.

    As long as the military is not on your side, you will lose badly. And as long as the soldiers don’t suffer, they will support the status quo because they have something to lose.

    • moustachio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      The military won’t last long if they kill their entire workforce. At best they can have a stalemate, where “they” win, but no longer have anyone to build their weapons and ammo anymore.

      • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        They’d be killing their own relatives and neighbors. Pretty hard to run a society that is decimated. Eventually even those in power realize how off the rails it is. If the military is heavily made of draftees it is more likely they’d refuse such orders.

      • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        They don’t need to kill the entire workforce. People generally don’t want to die, so you only need to kill a small fraction to terrorize the rest into submitting.

        This has worked for pretty much every single uprising since WW2. Just send in the tanks. Only when the military refused were uprisings successful.

        • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          This has worked for pretty much every single uprising since WW2. Just send in the tanks. Only when the military refused were uprisings successful.

          Vietnam, Cambodia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Myanmar disagree with you

          • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 days ago

            True. I should’ve added: “Without significant foreign support”.

            Like no shit, if neighboring countries provides weapons, training and even manpower then it’s hardly considered an uprising, is it? More like a proxy war.

            That covers Vietnam, Cambodia and Syria. The latter was literally just a gigantic proxy war. Like look at this shit, this is not a popular uprising:

            Don’t know enough about Iraq, but in Afghanistan the military did jack shit against the Taliban and in Myanmar the military was the one rebelling.

            Every single uprising hinged on:

            • Who is supported by the country’s own military?
            • Who is supported by foreign nation’s militaries and to which extent?

            None of them depended on the popular opinion of civilians.

        • moustachio@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          When the military starts killing its own citizens it also galvanizes the population. It’s going to cause massive unrest even if they “win.”

          • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 days ago

            East Germany 1953, Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968, China 1989.

            It does not cause any long-lasting unrest. Crushing protests with tanks is extremely effective and has always worked if the military was called upon and willing.

            • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 days ago

              What outsiders don’t understand is that Americans are raised on tales of revolution, overthrowing the mightiest military on the face of the Earth. Once we start a revolution, it will never end until it succeeds.

              In most countries, what happens in the capitol decides it. If there’s a massive protest, and tanks crush it, then it’s over. But if tanks crush the massive protest in DC, it will just cause larger, more violent protests in NYC, Chicago, LA, and EVERY OTHER CITY IN AMERICA. The moment that MAGA orders the military to fire on protesting American citizens, every MAGA politician’s life goes on a very short clock, and every government building will burn. They will all be dead within a month.

              Americans have been socialized to be kind and empathetic, and even be polite to MAGA, who are the worst people on the planet, so we’re obeying the rules, and trying to get through this with our elections.

              But it is a very bad idea to mistake kindness for weakness. If MAGA pushes people like that over the line, past their breaking point, the backlash is going to be far more severe than they expect.

              Remember when Trump said that nobody expected Iran to fire back? Yes they did, and we all told him they would. But he ignored everybody’s advice, and was surprised at the obvious result. When he fires on American citizens (and he will fire on American citizens, it’s as inevitable as starting a war always was), he’s going to be very surprised when we punch back, and start killing all of his accomplices.

              There’s about a 50-50 chance this ends with a French Revolution-style party, and just yesterday Trump said he didn’t care if people can’t afford gas. That was his “Let Them Eat Cake” moment, but he is too virtuosically ignorant to understand where that leads.

            • moustachio@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 days ago

              That’s a big IF for the military being willing. They are a huge chunk of the budget and that would be a PR nightmare and jeopardize their generally positive public perception

      • glimse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        The failures in Iran have almost nothing to do with power, it’s the complete lack of strategy.

        Additionally, Iran has missiles. Civilians do not.

          • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 days ago

            Full control of everything? It would take at most around 1000 soldiers on the ground to siege a modern a city - shut down water, electricity and close the highways - and you’ll regain control. People don’t like to live without food and water.

            Plus no country cares what you do to your own population beyond strongly worded letters and maybe some targeted sanctions against like 3 entities.

        • Denvil@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          But we do have rockets!

          bottle rockets, but y’know, could probably take on a tank… toy…

  • zout@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    Disclaimer up front; I’m from Europe, so call me an arm chair specialist. Also, this is all hypothetical, in no way I want to promote violence.

    Well, for most people it has to be on a weekend and not too far away, since they can’t afford to lose their job. (This is usually given as a reason to not go on general strike) Also, the right to bear arms is specifically meant for this scenario, but the people who currently exercise this right are usually the ones defending “the Epstein class”. (Great name BTW)

    • durinn@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      Nice. That’s a great way to describe how the working class has been manipulated into a life that makes us feel guilty for even thinking about strike. Also, arm chair specialism is also needed. Never apologize for the insights that you can provide! :)

  • Goldholz @lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    I am fully honest, the USA needs a complete overhaul. Fundamental change in all aspects. Economy, social aparatus, government, election, administration, infrastructure aso.

    Sadly it wont be able to with reform. Such grand overhaul is only possible threw a hard reset forced by a violent teardown of the old system, so a new system can be rebuild ontop. Like germany after ww2

    • durinn@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      Thank you for saying what I was afraid to say. Assuming you are from the US, it’s great to see that you’re not all reformists. :D

      • Goldholz @lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        I am not from the US. If reform were possible non violently that would be my way of choice, how ever, it is impossible for a third party to gain any power, and the only two partys want to either keep the status quo or want to create a white ethno christian zealot state to the likes of north korea, just with more religiouse and racial undertones.

        They will never change the system to a degree so the needed change can be done. And honestly neither do people lol

        Sometimes you have to force people into a system. (I cant belief im saying that as a stonch advocate for true democracy, freedom and social systems) but it is true.

        Though i am a realist that sees when things just cant be done peacefully anymore, when the system has to be brought to its knees. But what each and everyone can do: UNIONISE! Fact is that partially why USA has so shit work rights rn and why workers righrs are on decline everywhere is due to people not unionizing!!! TOGETHER WE WORKERS ARE STRONG!!