This video stirs emotions, but the only one I was left with was anger and an urge to destroy which I realized was morally wrong. The video is a contradiction. It seems to be a call for creation, but ultimately the âgoodâ people in the videos are just thieves. Without offering a new mechanism to reward skills and effort and distribute the benefits to society, they simply take trains, roads, time, capital goods, and property like vandals.
This is not new or revolutionary, it is the redistribution of private property and means of commerce through violence.
Itâs been tried before and never works over time because success fundamentally requires continued violence and killing.
ânetworked global resistanceâ
Yeah, Iâm glad we were so nice to King George that he let us have our own country. And all those nice slaveowners just letting their slaves go. Oh, and letâs not forget that German regime from the thirties and forties. Good thing we didnât use violence there and just let things work themselves out. Oh, waitâŚ
And as far as redistribution goes, our current distribution is broken. A system where a handful of billionaires control the vast majority of political power while 1/5 children live below the poverty line is one in which the lesser violence lies in taking from the hoarding leeches that the starving masses might have a future.
To argue otherwise is sheer cowardice.
Indeed, who can forget VE Day when a brave collective of Allied digital media artists anger-posted to Vimeo? That single event changed the direction of the war!
I know youâre making fun, and rightfully so in this case I think, but letâs not pretend that propaganda wasnât used heavily on all sides of that conflict to great effect.
But so does the maintenance of private property, at least as we know it. Take a look around.
If your point is, âThe American patriots rose up against a regime of forced wealth & capital redistribution through violence and replaced it with mechanism where the naked aggression of capitalism is balanced by local democracy,â then I totally agree with your sense of balance.
The video is call to destroy the current world around us, but not how to replace it. Thatâs pure anarchy.
Iâm not happy with the world I see today, but I am not so foolish as to think everyone will just wake up one day and be âcoolâ according to my definition of âcool.â
This is a nice little video; I especially liked the juicy sound. But I have to point out that it does not, actually, propose anything specific. If we are going to have ânetworked, global resistance to catastrophe and corruptionâ, we will have to do something material about it, and it will probably have to be a bit more complicated and long-term than gathering on the street and waving banners.
My point was that violence often is the only feasible solution to oppression, and while it should definitely be a last resort, it is a great danger to take it off the table completely.
I agree that this video is tall on excitement and very short on substance, and that any movement without the proper direction is doomed to fail even in success.
Itâs an interesting point.
In my opinion, âprivate propertyâ is a right granted to individuals by the government that protects the sovereignty of the land. In philosophy, itâs no more amazing that a copyright, but we ascribe property more certainty because land and buildings have our own âblood, sweat, and tears.â
Capitalism sucks, it just sucks less than the alternatives.
You say you want a revolution
Well, you know We all want to change the world
You tell me that itâs evolution
Well, you know We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Donât you know that you can count me out
Donât you know itâs gonna be all right?
All right, all right
You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
Weâd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
Weâre all doing what we can
But if you want money
For people with minds that hate
All I can tell is brother you have to wait
Donât you know itâs gonna be all right?
All right, all right
You say youâll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me itâs the institution
Well, you know
You better free you mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
You ainât going to make it with anyone anyhow
Donât you know itâs gonna be all right?
You have been conditioned like sheep, to regard your rulers as necessary, to fear their absence, and to resist the path of emancipation.
Donât be that guyâŚ
I think the creators of this video should take a few minutes and listen to The Beatleâs Revolution before they start calling for âfightersâ to rise up. The creators of this video havenât identified specific problems that they want to solve and they have identified even less in the way of solutions. The narration of the video says ânew governments replace the ones just toppledâ at 3min 20sec. So are they saying that all governments, even new ones that have overthrown a corrupt government, are a problem? Is this a call for no government then, aka anarchy? If so, why do they later say that they need âleadersâ at 4min 46sec. Thereâs a strong anti-intellectual element at play in this video, which only praises makers, farmers, mechanics, and fighters, aka the proletariat. The makers of this video should read up on Maoâs Cultural Revolution to see where these sort of half-baked calls to violence against the bourgeoisie can end up leading.
Well⌠we could try the Weathermen approach again, or maybe ELF, no?
Capitalism sucks, it just sucks less than the alternatives.
I am not sure that is the case any longer. There was an increasing concentration of capital in the few through then 1800âs, possibly peaking. The British Empire had the Boer War, and practically everyone had WWâs 1 and 2. Think how much you must have actually had to be a billionaire back in the 1920âs. WW2 got us back to about the 1830âs in terms of the 1%-ersâ hold on humanity. We are now back to the peak in the late 1800âs and pushing into new territory.
I agree - the video gives no concrete ideas for action. I wish it did. I wish I had such ideas myself. But the counter-idea that the world should be run by 1% for their own gain; that global warming should be publicly denied because capital demands it; that we should develop medicines for aged, rich people, and the cattle they eat, rather than preventative medicine; and, oh itâs a new year and I donât want to get us all depressed, but, hey, Iâm an engineer. Some of you are too. We fix stuff. We can fix all of this. And not fixing it bugs us.
If you understand that frustration, then you understand the video. It is not about destroying: it is about not destroying. It is not encouraging theft: it is about trying to stop the bigger thefts. If they donât have a good idea of how thatâs done, well doubt and self-analysis is good - beware the people who say there is only one way, and thatâs their way, and everything else is anarchy. Believe that, and you are theirs forever.
So TailOfTruth, you think that terrorism is a viable means as long as they further an end you agree with? What happens when a group that doesnât share your political goals adopts the same violent, terrorist approach that the Weathermen tried? I imagine that you would not support a group trying to spread the implementation of Sharia Law via the Weathermenâs means. If the means are inappropriate in that case, why would those same means be acceptable in the service of goals that you happen to agree with?
Dude, your sarcasm sensor is broke. I would get that fixed ASAP.
Iâm glad you were being sarcastic, but you might want to make your sarcasm a little more obvious when you are throwing out suggestions that âwe could try the [insert terrorist group]'s approachâ. What happens if someone less sophisticated reads that comment after being stirred up by this inane video? Thereâs a reason that the internet had to invent the sarcasm tag /s
