Skip to main content

The orgy of corruption and criminality by the ruling class in the U.S. has reached a crescendo.  The looting is now being done almost in broad daylight.

As the social safety net is taken down with a brutal efficiency, and at a faster and faster rate, the number of people falling on hard times as a result continues to increase.

Institutions that serve as social pressure relieve valves have all been corrupted to the core.  Democracy is dead.  The entire justice system does not work for the average citizen.

Right now people are in a state of disbelief.  They keep waiting for "someone" to say "Wait a goddamned minute here... This is wrong, and I'm going to fix it."  But there is no such leader.

In the face of worldwide massive protests in much of the world, and for mainly of the same reasons, there is a eerie passivity in the U.S.  But that may be about to change.  And when it does, you will hear some "talking heads" going on and on about how surprised they are about the level of destruction and violence.

But all the conditions for such social upheaval have been met...

The exploitation and pressure many segments of the population are being subjected to is so great, that eventually they will explode in anger.

A confluence of factors will comet into play: There will be opportunists that take advantage of the situation and will loot and burn things down; there will be those who feel they have nothing else to lose, and nowhere to turn for redress of injustices and exploitation; there will be the hate groups that have been waiting for the opportunity to cause mayhem; there will be the throngs of unemployed and disaffected youths.

The media and talking heads will pit each group against the other; there will be discussions of race, ethnic, and class issues.  And of how terrible the vandals are, and about how they are destroying their own neighborhoods.

But in reality, there will only be one cause: The complete corruption of our government and judicial system by corporate interests and the subsequent oppression and exploitation of the citizenry.

And the potential for violence is very high, given the number of firearms in this country.

And then, the eerie passivity for such a long period of time during which the corruption and oppression spread, will make more sense.

Another cause for this is that while we were in an immediate and dire crisis caused by the pillaging of the country, no one single high-profile leader on the Left rose to the occasion.  Those that did tried to address the situation were timid, ineffective, and didn't react with sufficient passion and conviction.

This allowed anger and despair to simmer... And it will eventually blow off.

The system failed the people.  The leaders did not lead.  The rich and powerful acted with impunity and brazenness.  Uprising ensues.

It will start with seemingly random acts of violence... Domestic disputes (as people buckle under the pressure of a corrupt system).  Then you'll see rowdy behavior at youth gatherings, resulting in skirmishes and mini-riots.  The corporate-owned media will try to hide it.

And then it will spread from city to city... And it will eventually reach a level of violence and intensity that will catch our political leaders by surprise.  But it shouldn't.  

Many of these leaders have heard about the concept of "no justice, no peace."  When the citizens of a country are pushed to the brink, and are oppressed and exploited, and when the rich and powerful commit crimes with impunity, and when there is no way to redress these things, societies revolt.  And when it starts, it seems chaotic and senseless.  But it's not.

It makes all the sense in the world.  Get ready for it....



How likely it is that there will be social unrest in the U.S. in the near future?

76%169 votes
17%38 votes
6%14 votes

| 221 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Robert A Zimmerman (9+ / 0-)

    said it best.

    “ Obama plays a dangerous game. The chessboard has taken on unforseen dimensions. ”

    by ozsea1 on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 12:53:02 AM PDT

  •  It is the hopelessness and helplessness (6+ / 0-)

    that eventually prods and pushes the underbelly of overwhelming sadness to literally explode in an orgy of actionable violence.....

    this release of anxiety/tension/frustration is very ugly and at this time looks almost inevitable......

    Please do not tell me you are involved by being a member of DK4....really get involved.... The goal is not to bring your adversaries to their knees but to their senses. -- Mahatma Gandhi

    by Mindmover on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 01:18:00 AM PDT

    •  I read a couple things in the last two days (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      esquimaux, Ray Pensador, Mentatmark

      that got my attention - especially since they are focused on my state!

      In my local paper I read:  "...analysists at the Co Information Analysis Center are trained and dedicated to monitoring social media sites...."

      I was not aware that we had such a center apparently run through the Department of Public Safety!

      Secondly, this little tidbit showed up online.

      Feel how you will about the oathkeepers, but if this is an official FBI document, it isn't aimed at terrorists, it is aimed at local citizens who may be "stocking up" against what they believe to be a serious breakdown of society or natural disaster, in either case, it doesn't pass the smell test.  

      So, I guess it is just us who don't think that we will be rioting in the streets, the government seems to not only anticipate it but is apparently looking forward to trying out all their new toys!

  •  I doubt it... (7+ / 0-)

    I'm 32 yrs old, and during my entire lifetime I have only known an America of passive people who bend over and take the latest violation from politicians, with barely a squeal. The only exception to that rule that I've ever seen was the brief rise of Ross Perot -- but he had billions of dollars, without which the people would have just passively voted for one of the major party candidates.

    Perhaps I just haven't lived long enough yet to see a wide enough variety of possibilities for how Americans can think, live, and act, but I find it hard to imagine that the American people today would ever really rise up in any kind of strong and assertive action against the established order. They will blog about how angry they are, and many will stop voting and start regarding the government as just a disgusting ruling elite rather than representatives of the people -- and the mythology of the American Dream and the Great Experiment of representative democracy will largely die in the consciousness of our society -- but that'll be about it.

    If I'm wrong, then I guess it'll teach me the lesson that the culture of a people can change very rapidly. We'll see!

    Eric Stetson -- Author, Speaker, Visionary.

    by Eric Stetson on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 01:50:09 AM PDT

    •  Let me add this point: (7+ / 0-)

      Riots are a very extreme action of protest against an established order in society. Before people would ever even get to that point, I would think they would try the following less extreme measures first:

      1. supporting anti-establishment primary candidates against incumbents in both parties

      2. starting and supporting third parties

      3. nonviolent protest marches

      Only if none of those things work to bring positive change, and things get extremely bad (much worse than they are now), would the average person even consider rioting as an option.

      Therefore, since none of the three things I listed as less extreme options than rioting are even being tried yet (well, the first one to some degree, but only in the Republican Party), I think it's a big stretch to say that riots will happen in American anytime soon. People aren't doing anything significant -- even minor things that are still somewhat "working within the system" -- to try to change things. People are angry and are complaining a lot on the internet, but they aren't even taking any kind of real action of any kind. They are still voting for mainstream politicians and accepting the crap government we are getting, despite disliking it.

      Eric Stetson -- Author, Speaker, Visionary.

      by Eric Stetson on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 01:57:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Why would people who are desperate (10+ / 0-)

        and to their breaking point suddenly stop loading their guns and killing their families and members of their community and instead for perhaps the first time in their lives take organized political action which has proven repeatedly to be ineffectual? They know they are screwed and that the system is stacked against them. You act as though this is not taking place already.

      •  1st the Media will not allow (5+ / 0-)

        anything left of far right.  They will destroy anybody for the people before they can get a foothold in politics.  Always has.

        2nd  Ralph Nader.  Admitted he want George W. Bush to win.

        3rd Went to Washington DC with the Union's with Ed Schultz.  Spent good money there.  Hotel, food and sightseeing.   Nada.  Media pretty much ignored the event.   As I recall the media mocked the size of the crowd.  Going to Washington DC might make the crowd feel powerful but that's about it.  It has no impact.

        4th  If they come out in every City across the nation might make them notice.  That has not been tried yet.

        "When the powerless are shut out of the media, we will make the media irrelevant" ~Anonymous~

        by Paddy999 on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 04:58:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Quibbles (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dude1701, Sandino

        We have tried all three.

        We thought President Obama was going to do this- Change, Hope?

        1. supporting anti-establishment primary candidates against incumbents in both parties


        2. starting and supporting third parties

        All through the aughts and even last October. Media barely covered any of it.

        3. nonviolent protest marches

        Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance.

        by Horace Boothroyd III on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 07:41:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Civil Unrest has an Evolution (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ray Pensador

        Maybe we are not to the rioting stage yet (although some town halls may have felt like a riot when the teabaggers were doing it), I do know that your step 3 has been in process for a while now. Here is a link to a Flickr set I just put together of 10 pictures of 9 different marches or rallies. I have not uploaded the last two events I photographed yet, but this weekend, I plan to be busy at the computer getting that done.

        Just your average every day Autistic hillbilly/biker/activist/union steward with an engineering degree.

        by Mentatmark on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 10:46:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Not really old enough to remember (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ray Pensador

      Civil Rights or Kent State huh?

      Just because the Civil War was that many years ago...doesn't mean it could never happen again.

      There's a growing underbelly in this country that has spread far and wide from a handful of militia's and White supremacist groups preparing and relishing in it. You have those like Alex Jones preparing and brain-washing scores more to accept it as inevitable. Not to mention many many so-called Christians expecting Mad Max conditions to break out to signal the coming of their savior.

      It doesn't take a majority of people to create chaos for everyone else.  

      One match and a bit of kindling or fat lighter can create a massive bon fire.

  •  You're wrong. (15+ / 0-)

    Most Americans, particularly ones of prime rioting age, would much rather play the videogame version of London Riots (rated "T" for teens) on their PS3s than actually riot.

    Besides, the only time people riot in North America is if their team wins or loses a sports championship. Remember Vancouver after the Stanley Cup?

    It sounds to me like you want this idiocy to happen here.
    Count me out.

    How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

    by BenderRodriguez on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 02:14:48 AM PDT

    •  I was gonna say the same thing: the only riots (5+ / 0-)

      in America will be on the screens of some hot new video game in which players can get out their anger at the government in a virtual reality riot. That's how Americans roll. (In some ways that's better, since real riots are a terrible thing. On the other hand, the extreme passivity of the American people is troubling.)

      Eric Stetson -- Author, Speaker, Visionary.

      by Eric Stetson on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 02:18:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I guess you folks weren't aroung in 1968. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CuriousBoston, viscerality, Rogneid

        Or more recently people have rioted in response to police violence in various parts of the country.

        Point being, Americans are not always passive and so obsessed with middle class toys like video games that they don't respond when provoked.

        Listen up, guys! It turns out that if we don't hurry up and change the world, later it's the world that changes us. --Mafalda

        by forester on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 04:06:40 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They didn't have video games in 1968. (5+ / 0-)

          Pong was first released in 1972.

          I don't entirely buy the "video games will stop riots" idea, but we can't deny that they are an outlet for people to take out their aggressive feelings and frustrations in acts of virtual violence—an outlet that wasn't available in 1968.

          •  You think that what is happening in London... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Horace Boothroyd III

            can't or won't happen here?

            I think with the right provocation it certainly can happen here, in the right city, the right neighborhood, especially if there is a history of policy and community confrontation and the neighborhood has been deeply unemployed for the past decade.

            VIdeo games? I can't believe I'm reading this.

            Listen up, guys! It turns out that if we don't hurry up and change the world, later it's the world that changes us. --Mafalda

            by forester on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 07:41:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Like I said, I don't entirely buy... (0+ / 0-)

              ...the "video games will stop riots" idea. I think I made that pretty clear when I wrote, well, exactly that.

              But I do think they are an outlet for frustrations that, if this were 1968, might have already boiled over into street demonstrations if not violence and riots.

              I do think that video games, cable TV, the internet, etc. tend to "defuse" and dissipate some of that energy and frustration in a way that wasn't the case in 1968, and in the US I think that effect is compounded by the general atomization and low density of even our urban communities (as opposed to more densely-packed cities and towns in the UK) and fewer expectations from our federal, state, and local governments.

              I don't think that rules out the possibility of mass street demonstrations or riotous violence here, but I do think it makes the "energy floor" for such things—that is, the amount of energy from frustration and anger needing release—a bit higher than it was in 1968 and a bit higher than it is in the UK in the present context.

        •  The 60s are like a different world compared to (0+ / 0-)

          today's America. Most people who have grown up post-60s, i.e. Gen X and Y, are into expressing their anger on computers, not in the streets. It's a fundamental cultural shift.

          Among the younger generations of Americans, the perception is that protests of any kind (even the nonviolent kind) are usually something you laugh at, not join.

          Eric Stetson -- Author, Speaker, Visionary.

          by Eric Stetson on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 11:53:45 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think you folks are all caught in a class bubble (0+ / 0-)

            Sorry, it had to be said.

            These kinds of riots are not the same as planned protests. There are been riots in the US in every decade SINCE 1968. depending on where you live, what newspapers you read, where your family lives, who you talk to on a daily basis, this kind of information may not have pierced your bubble.

            Sure children of privilege don't live the way they did in the sixties. Children of the middle class don't have any marxist analysis anymore. Surely, that is not who we are talking about when we talk about the possibility of "coming riots."

            Listen up, guys! It turns out that if we don't hurry up and change the world, later it's the world that changes us. --Mafalda

            by forester on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 09:22:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  What happens when they can't play their (0+ / 0-)

      games? - that's when the rioting starts.

    •  When Mom and Dad can no longer afford (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ray Pensador

      the latest and greatest videogames anymore...young people will be restless.

      It sounds to me that there are some folks that are disappointed that it hasn't happened yet.

      I happen to think that it is EXACTLY what we are headed for and have thought so for some time....but I have also believed that it would start in the rest of the world first before it would catch on here....but believed it would eventually.

      However, I am in no way excited about the prospect.....and not sure the ultimate outcome. Things would be living hell while it occurred and I am not sure things will be better for anyone in the aftermath. You see it's also possible the people do not win and end up even more oppressed than we are now. Put me in the camp of ambivalence about this at this moment.....that could change...but I am certainly anxious about the prospect of this.

      •  I don't want riots... (0+ / 0-)

        I am totally opposed to violence. Saying that Americans would rather play video games about rioting than doing it for real doesn't mean I'm saying they should riot in real life. What I was saying is that Americans are too apathetic and the fact that riots won't happen here although they will happen in many other countries is because of our culture's tendency toward apathy. Believe it or not, sometimes negative cultural traits can have positive outcomes.

        But I do think nonviolent protests on a large scale could be a good idea. And the apathy produces a negative outcome by preventing that from happening too.

        Eric Stetson -- Author, Speaker, Visionary.

        by Eric Stetson on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 11:50:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I believe you may be right, (32+ / 0-)

    and I have expressed my own wariness about the American Rightwing finally driving the nation to the breaking point.

    But what keeps me up at night is that it is a lot more likely that such violent social unrest will lead to cold-blooded black-boots-on-their-necks Christianist fascism rather than a national gutcheck that leads to profound societal reform.

    Millions of scared people who already vote against their best interests as it is would soon be loudly demanding that something, anything, be done to restore order if such outbreaks occur.

    And the Koch Brothers crowd will be perfectly willing to amplify those calls with their money and their big media messaging machines.

    The same staggering disregard for the plight of the poor, the sick, the dispossessed, and the aged from America's ruling elite will manifest itself pretty quickly in a new way, with constant calls for the rioters to be put down by any means necessary. Even if it means that they be shot down like dogs in the street.

    I think that sometimes people who are very clued in to the great con job being run on the masses can mistake a deep-seeded desire for normalcy on the part of the low-information masses who don't give a shit about politics they just want to live their lives in peace for a much more complex sheep-like apathetic complacency.

    There was a point after 9/11 where, for all of the awful and abusive things that George W. Bush did, we were all collectively very lucky that W. wasn't intellectually ambitious and in his rich boy slacker dim-bulbery was more fixated on satisfying the forces of American greed and the greater glorifying of the top 2% than truly pushing the envelope of what he could have done domestically.

    The problem with being a liberal person who is fighting tooth and nail for more liberalism and liberal policy in America is that, liberal policy takes years to bear fruit, and the second liberal policy gets successfully passed and is culturally adopted as successful in the US, it stops being "liberal policy" and becomes simply "American policy" or just "policy".

    By comparison, Movement Conservatism is quick and easy.

    And, in cases of social unrest, that is where the the quick and easy part of the politics of the Right becomes the darkest and most dangerous.

    It's like being an amoeba, you respond to stimuli like a critter in a petrie dish responds to light and dark or hot and cold. In the exact moment that stores are on fire, and there is broken glass and broken bodies in the street, it's a lot easier for a wingnut to get up on a podium and pretty much say "I will shoot anyone who throws another brick!" to solve the problem of unrest. Worse, it makes a non-Movement Conservative's nuanced calls for a combination of restoring order through traditional policing and responding to the factors that led to the unrest with more detailed and involved solutions seem weak and almost indulgent of wrong-doing by comparison.  

    If Bush had suddenly demanded on the rubble pile of Ground Zero that the US military have domestic policing rights and declared martial law or a national state of emergency instead of pushing for a capital gains tax cut and America to get shopping forthwith, I think he would have gotten almost everything he demanded.

    I think the nation falling into unrest in the streets will be something that ends in tragedy and results in more, not less, of a stranglehold on the nation by the regressive forces that have already done so much damage in our lives.

    This is why I am a liberal, for National Security reasons. If the Right pushes the nation to the breaking point, the same Right will then be eradicating rights and freedom in the persuit of saving rights and freedom. More "burning down the village to save it" for the ages, and with a lot more people cheering for everything that makes our nation worth a damn be set aside for the order of Jesus and Apple pie-clad fascism than I care to think about as it happens.

  •  O masters, lords and rulers in all lands (5+ / 0-)

    How will the Future reckon with this Man?
    How answer his brute question in that hour
    When whirlwinds of rebellion shake all shores?
    How will it be with kingdoms and with kings —
    With those who shaped him to the thing he is —
    When this dumb Terror shall rise to judge the world.
    After the silence of the centuries?

    Edwin Markham - The man with a Hoe - 1899

  •  Violence is a mistake. Hopefully there are enough (8+ / 0-)

    honorable and committed people in every community to direct frustration and disappointment toward a constructive rather than a destructive alternative.

    •  Of course there are (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      People like this always are the majority. But they will have no influence over armed individuals or mobs.

    •  Agreed, but you might have noticed (0+ / 0-)

      that the country is fractured and powerful people have every incentive to make it more so. We have a government which is united only in it's contempt of the electorate. For the moment it's difficult to see representative democracy still exists.

      One can only hope that people learn some lessons from the examples of only the last six months. Peaceful protest can work in societies where the leadership is not so far gone as to think guns and murder are the legitimate prerogatives of rulers. If peaceful protest is an option, the violence is more destructive than creative, and only prolongs the pain and further divides the society.

      One thing to keep an eye on: in the past, going all the way back to the Roman emperors, governments have realized the utility of The Greater Threat. Once a society is fractured and dissatisfied with government, rulers can bring about unity and common purpose by identifying an outside threat to the nation's survival. They create a war. It's been done before with great success, not to mention great profitability.

      Improvement is change. Not all change is improvement.

      by ricklewsive on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 07:44:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Today I did voter registration for the first time (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        at our local farmer's market.  I live in a very Republican rural area.  Many people are extremely religious.

        Anyway, today I thought I was witnessing a miracle.  I didn't register anyone but I had conversation after conversation and what was truly amazing was how much we were all on the same page and wanting to see our fellow citizens come together and help bring about some solutions.

        One man who had worked for many years in a manufacturing setting was off next week to set up a furniture making business with two partners in another state.  We talked about entrepreneurship and how important the ACA is to the self employed.  He thanked me for the information on where to go to get information.  Another gentleman I think once told me he was a libertarian was telling me how important government financial regulations are.

        I have gone to the market in the past as a master gardener talking about kitchen gardening.  I didn't know what kind of reception I would get doing voter registration.  Everyone told me that they welcomed someone working on political and social issues.  I really could not believe the reception I got.  They all know of my support for the President.

        All is not lost if this can happen in my county.  Two and a half years ago we set up at the Democratic table at the county fair (of course after the Democrats were no longer there) as the Obama campaign.  No one came up to our table but one man who warned us about the KKK presence in the county.

  •  I will say that if the present trend continues, (4+ / 0-)

    social unrest also looms on the horizon.  On the other hand, I believe that if we can get enough people to the ballot box we might be able to avoid this.  However, it is going to be about convincing large numbers of people that feel completely left out of society to participate in the political process.  

    It gets on my nerves, and you know how I am about my nerves...

    by ciganka on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 03:30:59 AM PDT

    •  marginalization has been happening (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ray Pensador

      for a long time.....

      only 22% of US voting population voted in last presidential...

      this political process is dying on the vine.....

      Please do not tell me you are involved by being a member of DK4....really get involved.... The goal is not to bring your adversaries to their knees but to their senses. -- Mahatma Gandhi

      by Mindmover on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 02:54:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  There is no 'upcoming revolution', especially (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    from the left. Teabaggerism may somewhat count as a minor revolution and that came from a racist, reasonably well-to-do  majority and look what it wreaked.

    One bitter fact is two bit hacks populate the third rate fourth estate who are truly the fifth columnists. So, how did Obama piss you off today ?
    Call the media when they Lie

    by amk for obama on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 03:56:57 AM PDT

  •  Maybe we'll luck out and have non-violent (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    riots instead . . . . .

  •  I have been hearing it's happening in Philadelphia (4+ / 0-)

    but not a peep on TV or Internets.  Al Jazeera where are you?

    "When the powerless are shut out of the media, we will make the media irrelevant" ~Anonymous~

    by Paddy999 on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 04:41:33 AM PDT

  •  Tomorrow you're homeless (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Tonight it's a blast.

    Wisconsin is closed for political maintenance.

    by Subversive on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 05:02:01 AM PDT

  •  Not while American Idol is still on. Oh, look! (6+ / 0-)

    Another missing white woman!

    From 64 oz Mountain Dew's and triple cheeseburgers to cheap beer to football and reality TV, it's all bread and circuses all the time. No matter how bad things get, never underestimate the passivity and gluttony of American consumers.

    There will indeed be a horrific new wave of urban crime and violence by the end of this decade. But it has nothing to do with protest or rage against our corporate overlords. Instead it's simple demographics: a new generation of angry unemployed futureless young males for whom drugs and crime are the most viable 'career choice'. It's going to be a hideous echo of the urban crime epidemic circa 1975-1995.

  •  This diary should be hide rated, IMO. Blech (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Polly Syllabic

    Dangerous, too. I'm going to contact admins. Cheers.

    I ♥ President Barack Obama.

    by ericlewis0 on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 05:07:13 AM PDT

    •  And in any... (4+ / 0-)

      insurrection, there are also informants, just like any society.

      •  London wasn't an "insurrection." (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BenderRodriguez, erush1345

        It was a bunch of kids going around, burning down shops, destroying everything in their path, committing violence against those who got in their way, and stealing all they could get their hands on.

        While some (perhaps most) of the causes of the London riots were political, the riots themselves were not politically-motivated, nor were they done with the aim of taking down the state.

        I would gladly "inform" on a London-like "insurrection" happening in my city. There are neighborhoods in my city that still haven't recovered from the last such "insurrection," and that was 43 years ago.

        •  Where did I mention London? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Werewolf Prophet

          This diary is about potential violent riots in the U.S., possibly started by any combination of factors, including flash mobs. Surely there is looting involved in London, as there would be in any violent riot, but when I see rioters standing up to the police (breaking barricades, throwing rocks, etc.) that smacks of political confrontation, despite the media's spin to the contrary. Looters run from the police, not at them.

          Can you dispute the validity of my statement, other than correcting words that you've put in my mouth? My statement was about the willingness of some to run home and tattle to Mommy, and I happen to agree with you about criminal intentions.

          •  You didn't mention London. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            BenderRodriguez, erush1345

            But the diary is about the possibility that London-like protests—which, from all accounts I've heard including firsthand from people in London, have generally involved rioters running from the police to congregate and loot somewhere else—occurring in the US.

            London isn't an "insurrection." London is a riot by angry kids lashing out in completely inappropriate, antisocial ways, not for the purposes of taking down or even altering the state but for the purposes of getting free flat-screen TVs, XBoxen, and iPhones.

            "Informing" on such an "insurrection"—that is, identifying people one knows who participated, so that the police can find them and bring them to justice—isn't "running home and tattling to Mommy." Real people's lives and livelihoods are being ruined by these riots; the whole reason we have a legal system and a police force is to protect people from such things.

            •  Like you, Nixon was big on law and order. (3+ / 0-)

              Would you fink on the Kent State students?  Huh?  How about the Jackson State students?  Young hippie punks, eh?  Show em who's boss.  Law and order.  Power to the plutos, right on!

              When the rose lies withered by the roadside don't try to negotiate the bloom.

              by Atilla the Honey Bunny on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 08:34:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Jump to irrational, fact-free conclusions much? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

                by BenderRodriguez on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 08:42:33 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  So because I don't want to see... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                erush1345, BenderRodriguez

       neighborhood and my city plunge into another 40+ year hole, I'm a Nixon-esque authoritarian?

                If I'm not okay with allowing a riotous group of youths to run rampant through my neighborhood setting fires, stealing whatever they could get their hands on, doing violence to innocent bystanders or shopkeepers protecting their shops, I'm just like Nixon?

                Life's so simple when everything's black and white, isn't it? We wouldn't want any of that nasty gray to get in there and muddy things up. No, it's much easier this way: I'm either for any and all riots, or I'm a Nixon-esque authoritarian.

                Take your attitude and shove it. I have absolutely no problem with nonviolent civil disobedience and nonviolent direct action, but the second it crosses over into setting fires, beating innocent bystanders, and looting, I have absolutely no problem informing law enforcement about who's involved in those acts and having them arrest and try those who engage in violence, destruction, or theft for their crimes.

                •  Call out the National Guard (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Ray Pensador

                  Lock and load.  The authorities are here.  Fire when ready.  We'll show the punks who is boss.  Thanks for the tip, James.

                  Power to the plutos, right on!

                  When the rose lies withered by the roadside don't try to negotiate the bloom.

                  by Atilla the Honey Bunny on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 09:34:15 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Are you volunteering your neighborhood... (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    erush1345, BenderRodriguez

           be the first one burned and looted?

                    Will you be inviting the rioters to your house or apartment first, to take anything they feel like stealing, trash the place, beat up your family if they feel like it, and then set your home ablaze?

                    Because I don't want that shit to happen in my neighborhood. Only in the last half-decade have we really recovered from the '68 riots after the assassination of Dr. King—and some neighborhoods in my city still haven't.

                    So you're damn right I'm going to want the National Guard to stop riots. Peaceful protesters deserve every bit of legal protection, and nonviolent direct action should be met with a nonviolent response from law enforcement—but rioters deserve to be brought to justice by force if necessary.

                  •  Jump to irrational, fact-free conclusions much? (0+ / 0-)

                    How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

                    by BenderRodriguez on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 11:59:26 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Sincere question ... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Ray Pensador

                  You wrote that you'd have "absolutely no problem with nonviolent civil disobedience and nonviolent direct action," but what happens IF there's a violent, authoritarian crackdown in response? Do We the Sheeple just take it?

                  Nuclear is dead! Long live Renewables!

                  by The Werewolf Prophet on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 04:07:45 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Agreed... (0+ / 0-)

              I agree with you on the criminal intent of the rioters, but I note you qualify your comments, leading me to believe that you also agree that there is a certain element of political dissent involved in the London riots. I would guess that the idea of "insurrection" depends on who you would ask.

              My comment about "informers" was pointed at the original poster of this sub thread, highlighting the rush to go to the admins with anything that they don't agree with. You took off on the London tangent.

              Other than that, I think we agree more than we disagree. Thank you...


    •  Diarist's cell phone should be cut off too. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Johnny the Conqueroo, Dude1701

      Why is it that the Obama ❤'s have such a driving compulsion to censure, report and otherwise behave that free speech on a left blog is "dangerous" and hateful?

      More and more you undermine your own opinion and make it irrelevant to support a president who encourages such daft followers.


      by Aeolos on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 06:10:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think the govt (0+ / 0-)

    puts pot in our salad or something - no one seems to care about anything.  There will be no riots.  Just more eating and watching tv.

  •  Unrest is especially dangerous (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    marykk, ciganka

    here because of the number of guns and gun nuts in America. If we had something akin to the London disturbances here, tens of thousands would likely die due to gun violence.

  •  There Is a Potential for Violent Unrest (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    marykk, Atilla the Honey Bunny

    But it will come in the form of right-wing gun nuts attacking blacks, Mexicans and gays.  There will be no mass uprising against the current power structure.  Best to all.

    Find me fast on Daily Kos by following me.

    by bink on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 06:56:23 AM PDT

  •  You wish. Really, you do seem to. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    It's not going to happen, though.

    I'll Rochambeau you for it.

    by Rich in PA on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 07:13:50 AM PDT

  •  There are wide ranges of social unrest. (0+ / 0-)

    I still believe there is a possibility of wide spread protests and demonstrations which can be a positive thing if these things are carried out peacefully.  It can give people direction and encourage them to get involved in the process.  It can also apply pressure to our representatives.  

    It gets on my nerves, and you know how I am about my nerves...

    by ciganka on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 07:49:55 AM PDT

  •  what? no "breaking" with your diary? (0+ / 0-)

    Kick a "job creator" in the balls today!

    by memofromturner on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 08:19:52 AM PDT

  •  Pre-Election Riots (0+ / 0-)

    I expect wide-spread and violent riots leading up to the elections next year.

    Progressive, Independent, Unitarian, Vermonter.

    by Opinionated Ed on Sat Aug 13, 2011 at 08:28:03 AM PDT

  •  When they have spent and spent (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ray Pensador

    for homeland security, they were probably installing cameras and fixing it so no one could get near the leaders not even protestors.

    The only thing these people understand is money.  Don't buy from them.

    This is happening all over the world.  The rich are building their dreams.

    This country's leaders are helping write the rules.

    They are creating a global economy and don't care who they hurt financially or physically.  Look at the countries our young soldiers are dying in.  For what?  One world economy?

  •  Just thought you might wanna know (0+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Hidden by:

    what you are saying is almost the same thing Glen Beck has been saying for a long time.  
    The gun part is different.  He thinks the 2nd Amendment allows people to have guns and to defend their homes against mobs is one reason why.
    Also, I certainly agree that there are extreme right wing people who would do violence, but I think there are plenty of extreme libs who are also dangerous.
    I wouldn't want to mess with a Wisconsin union teacher.  They mean business.
    I don't agree with the Prez on much, but count me in on toning down the nasty name calling, etc.

    •  Yeah, right... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      I wouldn't want to mess with a Wisconsin union teacher.  They mean business.
      What does that mean? No teachers have attacked anyone--their demonstrations were invariably peaceful.

      Perhaps it bothers you that they dare to stand up for their rights?

      Where are your dangerous "extreme libs"? The only violence lately has been by various members of the right, shooting police officers, Unitarians, and abortion providers, and blowing up buildings.

      "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

      by happy camper on Sun Aug 14, 2011 at 09:18:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  HR, insults & RW nonsense. n/t (0+ / 0-)

      "This is about the human heart, and if that sounds corny, so be it." -- Keith Olbermann

      by allergywoman on Sun Aug 14, 2011 at 09:25:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The people most inclined to violence are.......... (0+ / 0-)

    either criminals or GOPers both of which hate government more than they hate corporations and their power.

    So, do you think that revolt will do anything to stop "the orgy of corruption and criminality by the ruling class in the U.S."?  How so?  

    Also, I do not think that the ruling class is unprepared for it.  The private security industry is profitable from what I hear.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site