harlock wrote on Jun 30, 2015, 17:57:
also, it would have to be digital because violent options are impossible. but if you shut down enough infrastructures and backbones and so forth, it would be much more difficult for them to respond to it... regardless of the military aspect, the idea of wiping debts and account records and so forth etc would be the main goal

Thank you, Tyler Durden. You can return to the basement now.

If the problem is electing the same people over and over, how is not voting at all solving the problem? Maybe if everyone who thought that way had gotten up and voted for Ross Perot, Ron Paul or Ralph Nader maybe something would have gotten changed. Don't misunderstand, you have it mostly right. There isn't much difference between the Rs and the Ds. But non-participation would seem to be more like a surrender than anything.

There are no easy answers. Term limits? Sounds good, until you realize that writing laws is complex -- and if the legislature is getting over turned all the time it just means the non-elected staffers will end up being the ones writing the laws. New parties? The system is effectively rigged against it.

I would very much like to be able to jump ahead a couple of hundred years and see how it all turns out...

This comment was edited on Jun 30, 2015, 23:18.