> Believe me, the govt.
>has ways of keeping even
>an Enlightened majority from exercising
>their so-called "rights."

I agree with this, which is why the change in attitudes has to be widespread. With the US system, will an enlightended majority stand for a corrupt government like in South Africa? I don't think so, and they have two weapons to fight it: with their vote and with their dollar. Boycotts work if enough people get behind them-that's how you send a message to a corporation. Voting can shut down oppressive politics, but nowhere near enough people do it.
The key to both of these tactics is to motivate people to educate themselves about the world around them and take action to improve the world. I've said before that apathy is a right, but I never said that we have to agree with it, or that we shouldn't try to change apathetic attitudes.

>>The U.S. government will never drop
>>bombs on its own soil.
>> There's just too much
>>of a risk of a
>>drastic change in the way
>>the people view their government
>>if they do that.

Ever hear of the Branch Dividians? Or Ruby Ridge?
What's the difference between bomb and a bullet? Both accomplish the same thing. People shouldn't care what method their government uses to murder their countrymen.

>They are the
>best trained killers in the
>world and also have a
>knack at doing so while
>preserving the illusion of "democracy"
>and "freedom."

Which is why I don't think an armed revolution will work. It's not a David vs. Goliath situation, it's David vs. five Goliaths (police, army, navy, air force, marines).

----------------------------------------
404 signature not found