Armed insurrection: when is it justified?

[canis582]

And can you make the case for it in the US or the nation where you currently reside?

[Taso]

Revolution is justified when the government fails the people, when it stops representing the people, the people being the majority, I suppose, but then again, it also cannot destroy the rights of the minority.

The country I reside in, the USA, I would say a revolution would be justified, and wouldn't occur until, the government takes away fundamental rights, going against the Constitution, and it appears the majority in government won't stop them.

[lehighguy]

It's justified when you think the results of the revolution will be worth the cost (revolutions can get ugly).

Usually though revolutions only happen when people can't afford to eat anymore, they have nothing to lose so getting shot by the army isn't that bad a price.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
Revolution is justified when the government fails the people, when it stops representing the people, the people being the majority, I suppose, but then again, it also cannot destroy the rights of the minority.

The country I reside in, the USA, I would say a revolution would be justified, and wouldn't occur until, the government takes away fundamental rights, going against the Constitution, and it appears the majority in government won't stop them.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, now. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Taso]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Revolution is justified when the government fails the people, when it stops representing the people, the people being the majority, I suppose, but then again, it also cannot destroy the rights of the minority.

The country I reside in, the USA, I would say a revolution would be justified, and wouldn't occur until, the government takes away fundamental rights, going against the Constitution, and it appears the majority in government won't stop them.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, now. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Nahhh, how? The Supreme Court ruled the Patriot Act unconstitutional.

[RedBean]

As for when it is "justified"....it's justified when you win, because otherwise you're just a domestic terrorist. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Seriously though...it becomes a justifiable option when the cost of compliance exceeds the cost of revolution, ie... the risk/reward of revolution outweighs the risk/reward of not revolting.

In the US, the cost of each option shows it isn't even a realistic possibility, as they have raised the cost of revolution to an extremely high level, so much that they have a lot of room to increase the price of compliance.....and they know that.

death/something new vs. status quo/status quo

Most folks just aren't willing to risk death for something different, at the expense of the status quo.

Especially considered that the reward of "something new" isn't guarenteed to be better for them, or that it will be in line with their desires or within their control......and that the price of their death may not even guarentee success, in that the chances of success for the overall effort is not quantified but assumed to be slim, given the same cost/benefit analysis for all likely participants.

[JayTee]

[ QUOTE ]
As for when it is "justified"....it's justified when you win, because otherwise you're just a domestic terrorist. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Seriously though...it becomes a justifiable option when the cost of compliance exceeds the cost of revolution, ie... the risk/reward of revolution outweighs the risk/reward of not revolting.

In the US, the cost of each option shows it isn't even a realistic possibility, as they have raised the cost of revolution to an extremely high level, so much that they have a lot of room to increase the price of compliance.....and they know that.

death/something new vs. status quo/status quo

Most folks just aren't willing to risk death for something different, at the expense of the status quo.

Especially considered that the reward of "something new" isn't guarenteed to be better for them, or that it will be in line with their desires or within their control......and that the price of their death may not even guarentee success, in that the chances of success for the overall effort is not quantified but assumed to be slim, given the same cost/benefit analysis for all likely participants.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the more reason to not let things get to the point that armed revolt is the only alternative.

[mrick]

[ QUOTE ]
Armed insurrection: when is it justified? it's justified when you win, because otherwise you're just a domestic terrorist. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]Don't mock, this actually is part of the answer.

Insurrection is only justified (1) retroactively, after it has succeeded, or (2) when it has a significant expectation of winning immediately, or (3) when it will probably be defeated in the immediate future but probably lays the foundations for future victory.

Note that, just like in poker, the 3rd reason has caused many suckers to get slaughtered.

[boracay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Armed insurrection: when is it justified? it's justified when you win, because otherwise you're just a domestic terrorist. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]Don't mock, this actually is part of the answer.

Insurrection is only justified (1) retroactively, after it has succeeded, or (2) when it has a significant expectation of winning immediately, or (3) when it will probably be defeated in the immediate future but probably lays the foundations for future victory.

Note that, just like in poker, the 3rd reason has caused many suckers to get slaughtered.

[/ QUOTE ]

Somehow you forgot about the most important and most successful reason (4) when fighting for freedom and independence or in case of occupation (or when aggressor is trying to install a puppet regime). Many rationalities lose it's importance, that's why it is the most successful. Sadly it's true, what's fighting for freedom for some that's terrorism for the others.

[canis582]

IMO, the media in the US makes it impossible for our democracy to function. It would be a lot more effective to revolt against our own version of Iran's ruling clerics, the mass media, who refuses to present actual issues while pimping Clinton and Guliani while ignoring Gravel and Ron Paul.