lol I didn't realize you were British. In any case, you're nation's success, and your liberties, are the result of the same forces as the US' success and liberty. In fact, I would say this is true to an even greater degree with the British.

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined."

-Patrick Henry, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

'Beware the sociopath in patriotic garb who advocates violence and murder when faced with the frustration of a decline phase in their nations existence. For he is full of shit.'

-Chris73, thinking about responses inbetween changing diapers and dinnertime in London, 2010

I'm not British, I just live here. I'm from Texas. And whatever violence is part of the history of the geographical area I'm from is useless when trying to find ways to deal with the situation we're currently in. What, Americans 250 years ago tarred and feathered folks so that gives us carte blanche to throw petrol bombs at other human beings because we're upset that we've fucked things up today? Please.

I take it you're in the "do nothing and hope everything gets better" camp. I hope that you are right and I am wrong, and it does not come to violence.

But if we continue to pretend that there is nothing wrong with our society, then violence is all but assured.

So, you were against the Revolutionary War?

Only half joking... I've no idea how silly it's gonna get before it gets fixed or a mass revolt ensues. My preference would be that those with the ability to fix the system, go off and fix the system before that happens, but I'm not opposed to refreshing the tree of liberty from time to time, when needed.


*tapping fingers on desk waiting for the change.....*

I never suggested that we have "carte blanche" concerning the use of violence. I pointed out that in the past violence occasionally achieved positive results. Are you deliberately misinterpreting my posts?

Violence is not the answer.
However, the answer might look violent.
2nd Amendment: "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
The answer is a non-government, non-corporate, militia of the people.
100,000 people march on Washington with signs about how the government is unresponsive to the needs of the people is cute.
100,000 armed people march on Washington, loaded or not, is a statement and cannot be ignored.
I do not advocate violence, but if the government is so corrupt and so irrevocably broken, then showing the government that the governed will, in solidarity, rise up against tyranny is a good start.

Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

If you want peace, prepare for war.

"I just wanna get my kicks before the whole Shithouse goes up in flames"--Jim Morrison

Thought I'd jump into this Quote-Off.

I seem to have mistakenly conflated your prior history lesson with Occam's apparently cavalier attitude towards launching home made explosives into crowds of (what I can only assume are) US citizens; some of whom will be protesting something and others who will be trying to maintain some order. I don't have a problem with either group. I have a problem with fools who advocate indiscriminate violence and dress it up in the patriotism of an earlier age.

My apologies.

Not really. Violence is just not a banner I leap towards with enthusiasm.

In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good.

-Sun Tzu

Ok, I guess that's it then. Enjoy your quotes.