So, what's it gonna take for everything to finally break. Over the past three years, I have been reading here and on other boards about how everything has been building to a head. Everyone seems convinced that "it can't last much longer". And yet, I have books from the 80s, and 70s, and even 60s, where the theme is the same. Somehow everything is always teetering on the brink, and can't last more than a few years. Yet, it never comes to fruition. It just keeps mounting higher and higher. Now, I am by no means about to become a polly, and declare that because it hasn't happened it can't. Many of the issues we track here are credible enough to worry about, and have real evidence which can be easily obtained by anyone who cares to look. The question is, will it ever truly collapse on its own (past "trigger points" have so far utterly failed to produce any real sign of collapse), or, as I asked once on the old old board (yourdon ezboard), is the revolution finally at hand? We can pontificate all we want about how bad things are. Those of us like INVAR can rail against all the armchair quaterbacks that everyone "talks about the weather but no one does anything about it", and some of us engage in activism against the monolithic state to no effect due to lack of any organized effort.
That is kind of the crux of all this. We talk constantly about the "sheeple", and their overweening desire to live the "nerf life". At any sign of dissent, we climb all over ourselves with declarations that the sheeple are finally waking up. The truth is, the sheeple will never just "wake up" on their own. It will take a massive disruption of Life As We Know It to get them to do anything, and at most all we will get is loud demands from them for the government to "make the bad things go away". We have to realize that only real privation, with no hope of government salvation, is ever going to motivate the masses to take back their lives. We also have to realize that, as we are now, we have nowhere near the critical mass to even dent the masses' awareness, and will most likely never amount to anything other than the small group of (mostly) conservative life-survivalists we are. We will most likely never be able to mount any "grassroots" campaign that will become high-profile enough to gain any credibility (Ross Perot had way more resources than us, and a less-controversial viewpoint, and look where he is).
The one thing our viewpoint has going for it is the fact that things really are piling up, and have been for a long time. And the higher something is piled up, the easier it is to knock it over. If all the potential situations started snowballing out of control, the ensuing disruption would disrupt society substantially, to the point that people really would have to do something about it. I know the policy in the past with this board is that we don't openly advocate overt action, to avoid attracting the wrong kind of attention. How long do you let that kind of attitude persist before it is no longer prudence that holds back your hand? And if you allow your hand to be loosed, in what direction do you let it fly? I don't think anyone here would advocate terrorism, since the populace needs to be made to move, not to cower further in their cocoons. But, I think the time has finally come for something other than angry phone calls/emails/letters to your congressman. Sooner or later, someone has to say they won't take it anymore. Do you want to keep wondering when the hammer will fall, or do you want to be able to say: "Finally..."
That is kind of the crux of all this. We talk constantly about the "sheeple", and their overweening desire to live the "nerf life". At any sign of dissent, we climb all over ourselves with declarations that the sheeple are finally waking up. The truth is, the sheeple will never just "wake up" on their own. It will take a massive disruption of Life As We Know It to get them to do anything, and at most all we will get is loud demands from them for the government to "make the bad things go away". We have to realize that only real privation, with no hope of government salvation, is ever going to motivate the masses to take back their lives. We also have to realize that, as we are now, we have nowhere near the critical mass to even dent the masses' awareness, and will most likely never amount to anything other than the small group of (mostly) conservative life-survivalists we are. We will most likely never be able to mount any "grassroots" campaign that will become high-profile enough to gain any credibility (Ross Perot had way more resources than us, and a less-controversial viewpoint, and look where he is).
The one thing our viewpoint has going for it is the fact that things really are piling up, and have been for a long time. And the higher something is piled up, the easier it is to knock it over. If all the potential situations started snowballing out of control, the ensuing disruption would disrupt society substantially, to the point that people really would have to do something about it. I know the policy in the past with this board is that we don't openly advocate overt action, to avoid attracting the wrong kind of attention. How long do you let that kind of attitude persist before it is no longer prudence that holds back your hand? And if you allow your hand to be loosed, in what direction do you let it fly? I don't think anyone here would advocate terrorism, since the populace needs to be made to move, not to cower further in their cocoons. But, I think the time has finally come for something other than angry phone calls/emails/letters to your congressman. Sooner or later, someone has to say they won't take it anymore. Do you want to keep wondering when the hammer will fall, or do you want to be able to say: "Finally..."
Hey, would the surprise factor be of any consequence if we all had the time to acclimate ourselves??? 
Intothegoodnight hi! Hope Little Pig excuses my impulsiveness to thread drift but your relevancy is tugging at me or so it seems. 
