Regime Change in America
A constant chorus of calls for regime change in Iran, Syria, Venezuela and North Korea weaves its way through American political dialogue. Yet in the past few years it has become obvious to anyone living outside the Washington beltway that the most sweeping mother of all regime changes needs to happen in America itself.
The country’s great experiment in freedom and democracy has run aground. Dollars have long trumped ideals and the halls of Congress are rife with corruption. The system of checks and balances has been compromised by corporate lobbyists who must scrutinize and vet every piece of major legislation before it can be voted into law. On the surface, things seem fine: Spectacular election campaigns reignite hope and usher in change; passionate debates unfold every day on CNN and FOX; and millions of people seem politically energized, launching cyber campaigns 24/7. In many ways, America’s two-party system seems to be thriving, offering substantive philosophical and policy choices. Yet teeming just beneath the surface is the truth:
Big Banks, Big Oil, Big Pharma and Big Food have the power … And every congressman and senator must feed at the corporate trough.
Only the rise of a mythical “third party” can save America now. The Tea Party movement is a promising start, but it must find a counterpoint – the birth of a radical Coffee Party movement on the left. Then America will be poised on the brink of an historic political power shift. As the planet heats up and our global systems approach their terminal tipping point, people in each movement will wake up to the fact that, in essence, they are both dreaming the same dream, fighting the same fight. Opposing views will synthesize into one powerful voice, one unified movement screaming for radical freedom, radical democracy and a future we can all believe in. Once this synthesis kicks in – maybe as soon as 2013 – we’ll see the first rumblings of true regime change in America.
—Kalle Lasn
56 comments on the article “Regime Change in America”
Displaying 51 - 56 of 56
Page 6 of 6
Anonymous
The internet is a beautiful thing. We can see what other people think. I support technology. I support having the freedom to drive two thousand miles if I want to. I support the guy who builds the tires so a guy can drive to work and answer phones for a company that makes tools so a guy can fix his bike so he can get to work for a woman who sells shoes. We need to work with each other. We should continue to buy things to help this process. We just need to make sure that we buy things that we need and we use things that we buy in an appropriate manner. No other time have we been able to learn the opinions of our neighbors in other countries from our own homes. Respect that we all have an effect on each other. It is worth the coal to fire this computer because I can learn your frustration and I can purchase a more eco-friendly car or motor cycle so I can get to work selling electrical components to people who want to monitor their energy usage so they can decide how to decrease their energy costs which will decrease their carbon footprint on our earth.
Anonymous
The internet is a beautiful thing. We can see what other people think. I support technology. I support having the freedom to drive two thousand miles if I want to. I support the guy who builds the tires so a guy can drive to work and answer phones for a company that makes tools so a guy can fix his bike so he can get to work for a woman who sells shoes. We need to work with each other. We should continue to buy things to help this process. We just need to make sure that we buy things that we need and we use things that we buy in an appropriate manner. No other time have we been able to learn the opinions of our neighbors in other countries from our own homes. Respect that we all have an effect on each other. It is worth the coal to fire this computer because I can learn your frustration and I can purchase a more eco-friendly car or motor cycle so I can get to work selling electrical components to people who want to monitor their energy usage so they can decide how to decrease their energy costs which will decrease their carbon footprint on our earth.
Anonymous
Revolutions don't solve anything. They are always superficial. A third party won't change human nature or human behavior. Selflessness and charity can never be imposed from outside. Basically, you can't solve the problems of government through government. That's like trying to perform brain surgery on your own brain.
Anonymous
Revolutions don't solve anything. They are always superficial. A third party won't change human nature or human behavior. Selflessness and charity can never be imposed from outside. Basically, you can't solve the problems of government through government. That's like trying to perform brain surgery on your own brain.
A mustard seed
Revolutions (especially ones directing opposing the state) always create a thicker and more impenetrable bureaucracy. Weber talks about the charismatic leader--its the same way with charismatic revolutions. We need to continue doing what many are already doing, setting up alternative "cells" within society that don't necessarily directly challenge the status quo, but instead foster free, organic spaces within which people can express alternative ways of political and social organization, and ways of articulating needs and grievances. I think a dogmatic, marxist strategy won't work in modern society; instead, flexibility of dogma and pluriformity of strategy is what will be most successful. This idea essentially comes from Antonio Gramsci, who I am sure many of you are familiar with. I think that the emphasis on the importance of resistance by means of civil society groups (the war of position) that calls into question the hegemony of the elite order has proved to be pretty successful. Look at the Zapatista movement in Mexico. There is something beautiful in their whole slogan of "ruling by obeying." Their "comandantes" and "subcomandantes" really seem to embody Gramsci's idea of the organic intellectual, who comes and listens (instead of forcing his own ideas on the people) and after he has learned what the realities are among the people, he acts as a voice that articulates these realities and these needs. I think that a pure and organic revolution will take many, many years. It won't happen by 2013. We need to escape the 'military logic' of conflict, and instead use a discourse-based form of resistance. My ideas are jumbled, but I think what I am trying to get at is the idea of a more sustainable, organic (yes, I like this word!), and flexible approach, one that ultimately "rules by obeying" and constantly adapts to fit the socio-cultural realities of the time. Any thoughts or critiques on this?
A mustard seed
Revolutions (especially ones directing opposing the state) always create a thicker and more impenetrable bureaucracy. Weber talks about the charismatic leader--its the same way with charismatic revolutions. We need to continue doing what many are already doing, setting up alternative "cells" within society that don't necessarily directly challenge the status quo, but instead foster free, organic spaces within which people can express alternative ways of political and social organization, and ways of articulating needs and grievances. I think a dogmatic, marxist strategy won't work in modern society; instead, flexibility of dogma and pluriformity of strategy is what will be most successful. This idea essentially comes from Antonio Gramsci, who I am sure many of you are familiar with. I think that the emphasis on the importance of resistance by means of civil society groups (the war of position) that calls into question the hegemony of the elite order has proved to be pretty successful. Look at the Zapatista movement in Mexico. There is something beautiful in their whole slogan of "ruling by obeying." Their "comandantes" and "subcomandantes" really seem to embody Gramsci's idea of the organic intellectual, who comes and listens (instead of forcing his own ideas on the people) and after he has learned what the realities are among the people, he acts as a voice that articulates these realities and these needs. I think that a pure and organic revolution will take many, many years. It won't happen by 2013. We need to escape the 'military logic' of conflict, and instead use a discourse-based form of resistance. My ideas are jumbled, but I think what I am trying to get at is the idea of a more sustainable, organic (yes, I like this word!), and flexible approach, one that ultimately "rules by obeying" and constantly adapts to fit the socio-cultural realities of the time. Any thoughts or critiques on this?
Pages
Add a new comment