So apparently, there has been unrest in the Middle-East (when isn't there).
Governments are coming under pressure from revolutionary movements. There is no
such thing as a peaceful revolution.
Personally, my vote would go to
useful idiots
The US seems to like to romanticize protesters as agents
for peaceful change. They have the romanticized notion that the drugged out
hippies of the 60s actually accomplished something. Did they actually
accomplish something or did they take credit for something which was not their
doing? That issue is probably debatable.
Now i will go back to the
Middle East situation (most notably Egypt, now i guess Libya). You have a
movement to get out the disaffected youth (in this case youth seems to be under
40) to try and topple the government. The question is why are these people
coming out against the government? People tend to want to improve their
situation, sometimes their motivations are deeply misled and/or manipulated by
outside forces.
The "youth" seem to be easy targets for manipulation
(especially the 20 something and younger crowd in the US). Sure, they possess a
sense of idealism - but possess a really warped sense of reality. This usually
involves their views superimposed and assumed to be those of the rest of the
world. Sure, they would like to buy the world a Coke, however they would wonder
why other cultures might throw it back in their face or take that as an insult.
A solid personal ideology can keep you grounded, but it also can make you an
easy target - especially if it is more mindlessly accepted.
The first
thing you have to play up how something (like a revolution) will directly
benefit someone. They may not acknowledge it, but everyone does things for
"selfish" reasons. Maybe you can sell them snake oil about how a regime change
would benefit them economically - some will buy it. It seems "hope" is a
powerful force, but when it comes down to it - it is not the person's choices
that matters. What i mean is that in a revolutionary type movement, they are
using idealism and selfishness to sell an idea. Usually the idea is how the
country would be better if they were in charge (though they tend to leave out
that bit of information in the beginning). In other words, you have people
protesting/rioting for their own ideals - with the goal actually being
fulfilling someone else's goal.
It is kind of like a guy telling a girl
he loves her in order to get her into bed. Sure it may seem magical, but it is
ultimately a selfish proposition. Protesters are the female, the guy is the
puppet master. However, after the guy gets what he want, he isn't going to call
the female ever again. Well that is unless he has another goal that he can use
the protester for (use the protester is the key idea here). This is one thing
that protestors seem to be blissfully ignorant of (also the consequences of
getting what you think you want).
Many of the people aren't
necessarily going to scrutinize the first few years of the new regime - though
through revolution, they probably set the country back years. After the new
regime takes power, they have to figure out who is useful and who might cause
trouble. The trouble makers can suddenly go on vacation and never return or are
demonized.
The main point is that protestors are largely ignorant of
what is really going on. They have their own reason for protesting, whether it
be selfish reason, ignorance, delusion, etc. However, in something like a
revolution, the protests are anything but organic and are being led by an
outside force looking for gain. In other words, they are tool or a means to an
end. Once they have outlived their usefulness they will be discarded.
Protestors are largely the puppets of an outside force looking to capitalize on
the protestors actions to achieve their own goals (which may run contrary to
those of the protestors). There is no quicker and better way to achieve
economic prosperity that i know of than to destabilize a country [highly
sarcastic if you didn't know].
Garbage statements like "yes we can"
(worship Satan back-masked) are meant to play on that hope that things can
change for the better. These empty platitudes play on people's self interest.
The only change these people really want is more power for themselves. Change
for change's sake is usually an unmitigated disaster. Change might also refer
to the only money/resources you possess after they have had their way with you.
Original Post Date: 02/25/11
No comments:
Post a Comment