National disintegration

Post Reply New Topic

One can make too much of small indications but there is a general feeling of major disarray in the USA that seems to me to be very ominous. This article in today's NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/24/us/24guns.html?hp about major changes of attitudes in gun laws and the rise of huge resentments over government operations are probably not sufficient at the moment to be a real problem but it doesn't seem o me that there is much on the way to reverse a large number of somewhat independent negative trends that indicates major trouble ahead. I originally assumed the wild revolt of Joseph Stack was a case of insanity but subsequent reports indicate he was a man at the end of his ability to fight back at oppressive circumstances and chose to exhibit his total frustration in a dramatic way. I do not intend to indicate this is a typical frame of mind at the moment but the general resentment in the country over the lack of President Obama to hold true to all the promises he made to ensure his election and his obvious attachment to the forces that were the fundamental instruments in the current economic disarray of the country plus Obama's continuance of the bulk of the programs under G.W.Bush that were not approved of by much of the country makes the situation look very bad. It seems very unlikely that open violent revolt will take place in the near future but the pressure is building and there is not much encouragement on the horizon. The opposition to Obama has no believable strong leader at the moment but if one appears it could fore-tend a major disaster.

Everything is smoke and mirrors to keep us apart. As long as there is an us vs. them attitude.. those who do stand up will be brushed aside as kooks (right or left wing extremist) Heck we can even call out the National Guard to lock the "kooks" up.

I think Obama is a one term President.. he will get a nice pay check for the rest of his life. And he is getting a chance to expose some of the inner workings of DC to the public.. and we don't like what we see. But thanks to the 'change' we demanded being slapped aside.. our hope is lost. Obama was like a featherweight boxer going into a heavyweight match. Quick on his feet, some nice moves.. but unable to land serious punches.

Because we were not able to bring about change; less will care, less will vote, less will get involved in their communities. More will loose their homes and jobs... and we will turn our eyes from them.. or hang our head in silence if we are one of the unlucky.

The US is still in the same death spiral that it's been in for the past 40 years. The middle class was a bubble.. that is now burst. We will become like rest of the world, where a rich upper class rules over the poor.

yeah, in general oregon is correct. you'll probably see large skill industrial struggles across the US (also a noticeable increase in racist violence), couple of years of picket lines etc then the unions might finally get round to setting up the US Labour Party - course that would be game over for the Democratic party.

I think you can rest easy Sand, things here aren't as unstable as they are being made out to be. Obama is not a stupid man, and even in the extremely unlikely instance that the pot started to boil over, I have faith that he would do what was necessary to calm the situation, even at cost to himself and/or his party. It is getting a bit overblown in the press though, there's a lot of tooth nashing and tea parties going on, but I live in an area that contains one of the most liberal cities in the country (Seattle) but a 15 minute drive puts you squarely in Republican country, and on the ground everything is perfectly calm. Even the guys at my shooting club don't seem terribly riled, they were a bit alarmed when Obama was first elected, but now they're pretty ambivalent about him.

That NYT article was full of crap BTW, most of that gun stuff was in the works long before Obama came on the scene, it's the culmination of years of work in rolling back firearms regulations by a dedicated constituency and their advocates, it's not a reactionary move because of Obama. Now I won't say that he hasn't been used as a sort of political bogeyman to rally the troops to step up these long planned actions, but that's just political expediency for you, if you want to get things done you have to work with what you're given. His Illinois days do seem to paint a picture of an anti-gun platform, but I think he's too smart to even touch the issue, the ink wouldn't even be dry on any legislation he passed before his majorities were voted out of both houses and his agenda crushed. I could go on at length about the slant to that article and the related stories linked on the same page, but you're a clever fellow, I'm sure you spotted it too.

Google "Gerald Celente" the trend forecaster. One of his sayings is "When people have nothing left to lose, they lose it". (Go crazy)

America as a whole plus most of the states plus most of the cities and counties within the states are teetering on the edge of bankruptcy and default.
What will happen when they can no longer pay pensions and unemployment benefits or pay the wages of teachers and police?

In Detroit, bodies are piling up in the morgue because the city does not have the money to give them pauper's burials.
What will happen when the people of Detroit are told "Sorry folks. No more welfare. No more food stamps. No more pension checks.? We're broke."

That WILL happen this year or next year, then you will see millions of people "lose it"

Well . . . seems Robocop will be on the horizon soon . . .

On a side note, it was Obama who signed into law allowing firearms in National Parks. It's amazing that people do the chicken little dance because of something a nut on AM radio spouts off.

From what I seen Obama is not this Anti-Christ, Muslim, socialist, foreigner, that is out to turn the US into a communist country. His health care bill takes control of Insurance regulation from States and hands it to insurance companies on a silver platter. His stimulus packages have only benefited huge corporations, many are not even in the US.

The people will not revolt, they will just quietly be hauled off to prison. Currently 1 out of every 100 people in the US are behind bars... 60% have never been to trial. In 1980 that number was 1 in a 1000, and the majority of those stood trial within 1 month of arrest. But I guess I'm doing a 'chicken little' to be alarmed by this dramatic increase. After all, the US has more of it's population behind bars than any other country in the world because we are more criminal.

For details as to how Obama's crew bilked the nation out of billions of dollars by what should be criminal procedures, see http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney02242010.html

[quote="Oregon"
The US is still in the same death spiral that it's been in for the past 40 years. The middle class was a bubble.. that is now burst. We will become like rest of the world, where a rich upper class rules over the poor.[/quote]

And barring WW3, we will be on the same death spiral 40 years hence.

ruveyn

Pardon me sir, but some of us don't listen to AM radio, and do our own research and come to our own conclusions based on tangible things like a person's voting record and their statements and speeches, or in this case the things their attorney general has said. Obama gritted his teeth and signed that national parks law because it was attached to a piece of credit card legislation that he badly wanted passed, he certainly wouldn't have signed it otherwise, and deserves no credit for having done so. He consistently voted anti-gun in his time as a state congressman, his "guns and religion" speech was infamous, and his attorney general was talking about reviving the odious assault weapons bill until none other than Nancy Pelosi told him to shut up before he got them all un-elected. Obama has clearly realized that going after guns would be a political death sentence and would doom all of his other political priorities, and that fear is the only thing keeping him from going the Clinton route and pushing for more restrictive laws. That's why I smile when I see that his election has done more for gun rights than George W ever did, he's powerless to touch the issue legally, and his presence in the White House drives both sales and activism to levels not seen in years.

Incidentally, those not in the know might be drawing the wrong conclusions about a large chunk of the spike in gun sales since Obama's election; a good number of people who are purchasing semi automatic rifles and their accessories are speculators looking to turn a profit on a possible re-authorization of the "assault weapons" ban rather than people forming militias off in the woods. After the 1994 ban took effect, so called "pre-ban" weapon prices shot through the roof, along with the magazines that went with them. There was never a serious crimp in the supply, but a lot of people made a lot of money when $200 AKs turned into $400 AKs overnight, and high capacity magazines were even more lucrative since everyone knew what was coming and simply stamped out or imported as many as possible before the ban, then sat on them till the prices went up. Just a little FYI for people outside the US or those simply not familiar with the dynamics of the domestic firearms market.

Thank gawd there are some out there that think and not just hang on every word spewed forth by Faux News or Ol Rushbo. The majority of the Obama opposition is pure and simple rubbish.

I agree that he would not have signed the Weapons in parks thing if it was not attached to the Credit Card laws that went into effect this week. But, he did still sign it... so weapons control is not at the top of his agenda.

People say that Democrats are anti-war, but look at our history. We went into almost every major conflict with a Dem in office.

The illusion of a two party system is just to keep people separated. It's to maintain the us vs. them mentality that keeps the common people from taking control of the government.

Obama, the Prince, plays by Chicago Rules. Not a principle anywhere in sight. Nothing but political expediency. If it were necessary and expedient, he would push Michelle Under the Bus.

ruveyn

And barring WW3, we will be on the same death spiral 40 years hence.

ruveyn[/quote]

Odd . . . given that the War in the mid-East is still going on that it would count as WWIII. Or does this kind of event need to include 3-4 "first-world nations" to have the WW title?

The war(s) going on are not wide spread enough to count as world war.

A world war has to be fought on several continents in a continuous and co-ordinated way.

ruveyn

That's true, there are only about 38 major conflicts currently going on in the world right now (a major conflict is 1,000+ deaths per year). Hardly enough to count as a world war.

I'm not too worried - as in I firmly believe that the dissenters or disenfranchised are far from deranged or psychotic, I don't see rioting in the streets or the country calling defcon one. Our country has seen worse scandals many times over and likely there were even more people running around screaming that the sky is falling. The most important thing to do is take note of the policy situation, see what needs to be fixed, and actually have the will of the people being represented, on the other hand if you are of he variety who believe that the people are far too stupid to make those choices and would bring back Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition - sorry about your luck.

I think what we're most likely to see is the faces and styles/constructs of the parties changing. The democrats will likely pitch who's in right now, as will the republicans, no doubt that the 2010 elections will be very interesting as there might be a heck of flush in the House and the 1/3 of the Senate that can be voted on.