I don't mean to offend. It's probably going to happen anyway.

Friday, November 4, 2011


I hear the word revolution from the OWS folks quite frequently, as well as a few other sources. They, especially the OWS people, claim it as heroic or noble.

Not exactly.

Revolution is, by definition, failure. If you are in the course of revolution, it means that you are either incapable or disinclined to go about effecting change through non-violent means. Be this through personal incompetence or governmental tyranny is not entirely relevant. It means that the mechanisms of control by the people in government are stagnated or no longer wanted.

This is not to say that revolution is never the correct answer. It merely means that it can only be the lesser of two evils.

If you have to take up arms for something, it means that society and you have failed. And, to reference Robb Allen, avoiding failure takes more than rooting for the right team at the ballot box.

1 comment:

  1. As (I think it was...) Robert Heinlein put it, "Never denigrate politics. It's what we do instead of hitting each other over the head with sticks." Revolution simply means that the social contract, and thus society, has failed.

    Besides, what the hell do these people actually WANT?


Please comment, but please be respectful. I reserve the right to delete any comment at any time for any reason, but I don't anticipate having to do that. Let's try to have real discussions?