Revolution - Revision history

Fractalguy: /* Evolution, Not Revolution */

2025-07-30T22:45:46Z

Evolution, Not Revolution

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:45, 30 July 2025
Line 26:		Line 26:

	This approach also has the advantage of actually appealing to a majority of people, unlike any major revolutionary upheaval which will only ever attract a radical minority. Broad consensus can be built around the incrementalistic approach in the same way that we broadly agree with democracy, regardless of who we choose to vote for. If we build a sustained movement to raise awareness of why we need [[democracy]], [[balance of power]], [[trust]] in [[institutions]], and the possibilities of consistent, incremental change, we can get people to stop thinking about breaking the system and to start [[working]] on fixing it.		This approach also has the advantage of actually appealing to a majority of people, unlike any major revolutionary upheaval which will only ever attract a radical minority. Broad consensus can be built around the incrementalistic approach in the same way that we broadly agree with democracy, regardless of who we choose to vote for. If we build a sustained movement to raise awareness of why we need [[democracy]], [[balance of power]], [[trust]] in [[institutions]], and the possibilities of consistent, incremental change, we can get people to stop thinking about breaking the system and to start [[working]] on fixing it.

			This article in the [https://www.persuasion.community Persuasion Substack], [https://www.persuasion.community/p/gradual-change-is-fing-awesomeand Gradual Change is Fucking Awesome], makes a passionate defense of incrementalism.

	{{#ev:youtube\|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbHKbL_2JpE\|\|center\|Evolution, Not Revolution Revolution\|frame}}		{{#ev:youtube\|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbHKbL_2JpE\|\|center\|Evolution, Not Revolution Revolution\|frame}}

Fractalguy: /* Evolution, Not Revolution */

2025-07-05T22:01:59Z

Evolution, Not Revolution

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:01, 5 July 2025
Line 23:		Line 23:
	Voting for someone who promises to break the system is similarly fraught. We need a remodel, not a wrecking ball. You want a nicer house than the one you got, but you're going to hire a demolition crew to get it? Find a general contractor that knows what they are doing and if there are some parts that need a tear down they can sub that out. The guys with sledge hammers will only leave you rubble.		Voting for someone who promises to break the system is similarly fraught. We need a remodel, not a wrecking ball. You want a nicer house than the one you got, but you're going to hire a demolition crew to get it? Find a general contractor that knows what they are doing and if there are some parts that need a tear down they can sub that out. The guys with sledge hammers will only leave you rubble.

	Change can happen in [[democracy]] if people focus attention and build consensus one issue at a [[time]]. The most effective protest movements in recent (American) history--[[wikipedia:Civil_rights_movement\|civil rights]], [[wikipedia:Opposition_to_United_States_involvement_in_the_Vietnam_War\|Vietnam]], [[wikipedia:Environmental_movement\|environmentalism]], [[wikipedia:LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States\|LGBTQ+ rights]], [[wikipedia:Occupy_Wall_Street\|Occupy Wall Street]], [[wikipedia:Black_Lives_Matter\|Black Lives Matter]], etc., have all created long-term conversations about a single issue until the public awareness and opinion shifted dramatically. [[Rage\|While we are all sick of complacence, we must still be patient]]. And focused, which is increasingly hard in a [[society]] [[addicted]] to [[social media]].		Change can happen in [[democracy]] if people focus [[attention]] and build consensus one issue at a [[time]]. The most effective protest movements in recent (American) history--[[wikipedia:Civil_rights_movement\|civil rights]], [[wikipedia:Opposition_to_United_States_involvement_in_the_Vietnam_War\|Vietnam]], [[wikipedia:Environmental_movement\|environmentalism]], [[wikipedia:LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States\|LGBTQ+ rights]], [[wikipedia:Occupy_Wall_Street\|Occupy Wall Street]], [[wikipedia:Black_Lives_Matter\|Black Lives Matter]], etc., have all created long-term conversations about a single issue until the public awareness and opinion shifted dramatically. [[Rage\|While we are all sick of complacence, we must still be patient]]. And focused, which is increasingly hard in a [[society]] [[addicted]] to [[social media]].

	This approach also has the advantage of actually appealing to a majority of people, unlike any major revolutionary upheaval which will only ever attract a radical minority. Broad consensus can be built around the incrementalistic approach in the same way that we broadly agree with democracy, regardless of who we choose to vote for. If we build a sustained movement to raise awareness of why we need [[democracy]], [[balance of power]], [[trust]] in [[institutions]], and the possibilities of consistent, incremental change, we can get people to stop thinking about breaking the system and to start [[working]] on fixing it.		This approach also has the advantage of actually appealing to a majority of people, unlike any major revolutionary upheaval which will only ever attract a radical minority. Broad consensus can be built around the incrementalistic approach in the same way that we broadly agree with democracy, regardless of who we choose to vote for. If we build a sustained movement to raise awareness of why we need [[democracy]], [[balance of power]], [[trust]] in [[institutions]], and the possibilities of consistent, incremental change, we can get people to stop thinking about breaking the system and to start [[working]] on fixing it.

Fractalguy: /* Evolution, Not Revolution */

2025-02-16T23:48:04Z

Evolution, Not Revolution

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:48, 16 February 2025
Line 17:		Line 17:
	It is not practical nor desirable to tear down the [[institutions]] of an advanced [[society]] and attempt to rebuild them from scratch using some [[ideological]] or [[Utopia\|utopian]] model. If we look to [[history]] for examples, we find only a few examples where revolutions have not simply replaced one oppressor with another. Since [[Utilitarian#The Ends Are The Means\|the means are the ends]], [[violence]] rarely provides a path to [[peace]].		It is not practical nor desirable to tear down the [[institutions]] of an advanced [[society]] and attempt to rebuild them from scratch using some [[ideological]] or [[Utopia\|utopian]] model. If we look to [[history]] for examples, we find only a few examples where revolutions have not simply replaced one oppressor with another. Since [[Utilitarian#The Ends Are The Means\|the means are the ends]], [[violence]] rarely provides a path to [[peace]].

	[[wikipedia:Incrementalism\|Incrementalism]] is the [[necessary]] approach to [[social]] change in modern society. This is not to say that big changes that impact many lives are not possible, but these must be achieved within the framework of [[democracy]] in order to achieve them without coercion via actual or implied violence.		[[wikipedia:Incrementalism\|Incrementalism]] is the [[necessary]] approach to [[social]] change in modern society. This is not to say that big changes that impact many lives are not possible, but these must be achieved within the framework of [[democracy]] in order to achieve them without [[authoritarian]] coercion via actual or implied violence.

	The modern revolutionary is self-defeating. If you [[believe]] that the overthrow of modern [[capitalism]] and/or [[socialism]] is the only way to fix the system, you can sit back with self-satisfaction, telling yourself that when the revolution happens you'll be on the front line. In the meantime you don't have to do anything because [[democracy]] is broken and participating in the charade is pointless. It's a way to feel like a heroic radical while doing absolutely nothing for the cause. No [[wikipedia:Praxis_(process)\|praxis]]. 0.0000% of [[communism]] has been built. [https://discoelysium.fandom.com/wiki/Communists]		The modern revolutionary is self-defeating. If you [[believe]] that the overthrow of modern [[capitalism]] and/or [[socialism]] is the only way to fix the system, you can sit back with self-satisfaction, telling yourself that when the revolution happens you'll be on the front line. In the meantime you don't have to do anything because [[democracy]] is broken and participating in the charade is pointless. It's a way to feel like a heroic radical while doing absolutely nothing for the cause. No [[wikipedia:Praxis_(process)\|praxis]]. 0.0000% of [[communism]] has been built. [https://discoelysium.fandom.com/wiki/Communists]

Fractalguy at 23:47, 16 February 2025

2025-02-16T23:47:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:47, 16 February 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Revolution-protest-angry-mob-torches-evolution-incrementalism.jpg\|thumb\|Cathartic but less effective than talking to people]]A lot of people claim to want a revolution because they fail to see a viable path to a [[just]] [[political]] and [[economic]] system based on the current state of affairs.<blockquote>''"You say you want a revolution. Well, you know, we all want to change the world. But when you talk about destruction, don't you know that you can count me out."'' -[[wikipedia:The_Beatles\|Lennon/McCartney]]</blockquote>In a modern [[democratic]] [[capitalist]] [[society]], even when many [[institutions]] are run by oligarchs, there are always still non-violent ways for the people to enact their will when they unite behind a popular [[idea]]. [[Progress]] can easily be opposed when support is 50% or less. Once a supermajority consensus is reached, things are still able to happen. [[Social media]] has caused us to move away from consensus building and focus more on motivating and agitating the existing base of support around issues. Our reliance on this [[technology]] allows oligarchs to use the [[algorithm]] to maintain the 50/50 division on most issues. We must get offline and return to peer-to-peer [[persuasion]] in person.<blockquote>''"Those who make peaceful resolution impossible make violent revolution [[inevitable]]"'' -[[wikipedia:John_F._Kennedy\|John F. Kennedy]]</blockquote>[[Democracy\|Democracies]] can still enact the will of the majority. It only seems [[like]] they can't because we haven't been able to reach a [[wikipedia:Tipping_point_(sociology)\|tipping point]] on a new consensus about our vision for the [[future]], allowing those who [[profit]] from the status quo to easily divide us. However, the oligarchs are also aware that violence is terrible for [[profits]], and will usually refrain from escalating conflicts to that point. They don't want to make peaceful revolution impossible, just slightly less difficult than violent revolution.<blockquote>''“When Tyranny becomes Law, Rebellion becomes Duty”'' -[[wikipedia:Thomas_Jefferson\|Thomas Jefferson]]</blockquote>Practicing the power of persuasion, peaceful protest, political praxis, and populist partnerships, can [[probably]] prevent pugnacious people preparing to plunge the public into pugilism.		[[File:Revolution-protest-angry-mob-torches-evolution-incrementalism.jpg\|thumb\|Cathartic but less effective than talking to people]]A lot of people claim to want a revolution because they fail to see a viable path to a [[just]] [[political]] and [[economic]] system based on the current state of affairs.<blockquote>''"You say you want a revolution. Well, you know, we all want to change the world. But when you talk about destruction, don't you know that you can count me out."'' -[[wikipedia:The_Beatles\|Lennon/McCartney]]</blockquote>In a modern [[democratic]] [[capitalist]] [[society]], even when many [[institutions]] are run by oligarchs, there are always still non-violent ways for the people to enact their will when they unite behind a popular [[idea]]. [[Progress]] can easily be opposed when support is 50% or less. Once a supermajority consensus is reached, things are still able to happen. [[Social media]] has caused us to move away from consensus building and focus more on motivating and agitating the existing base of support around issues. Our reliance on this [[technology]] allows oligarchs to use the [[algorithm]] to maintain the 50/50 division on most issues. We must get offline and return to peer-to-peer [[persuasion]] in person.<blockquote>''"Those who make peaceful resolution impossible make violent revolution [[inevitable]]"'' -[[wikipedia:John_F._Kennedy\|John F. Kennedy]]</blockquote>[[Democracy\|Democracies]] can still enact the will of the majority. It only seems [[like]] they can't because we haven't been able to reach a [[wikipedia:Tipping_point_(sociology)\|tipping point]] on a new consensus about our vision for the [[future]], allowing those who [[profit]] from the status quo to easily divide us. However, the oligarchs are also aware that violence is terrible for [[profits]], and will usually refrain from escalating conflicts to that point (weapons manufacturers excepted). They don't want to make peaceful revolution impossible, just slightly less difficult than violent revolution.<blockquote>''“When Tyranny becomes Law, Rebellion becomes Duty”'' -[[wikipedia:Thomas_Jefferson\|Thomas Jefferson]]</blockquote>Practicing the power of persuasion, peaceful protest, political praxis, and populist partnerships, can [[probably]] prevent pugnacious people preparing to plunge the public into pugilism.

	If the [[injustice]] is codified and [[institutions]] have no path to reform, revolution is the only recourse. There are many innovative ways that this can be accomplished without [[violence]] if one is creative.		If the [[injustice]] is codified and [[institutions]] have no path to reform, revolution is the only recourse. There are many innovative ways that this can be accomplished without [[violence]] if one is creative.

Fractalguy at 04:27, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T04:27:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:27, 30 January 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Revolution-protest-angry-mob-torches-evolution-incrementalism.jpg\|thumb\|Cathartic but less effective than talking to people]]A lot of people claim to want a revolution because they fail to see a viable path to a [[just]] [[political]] and [[economic]] system based on the current state of affairs.<blockquote>''"You say you want a revolution. Well, you know, we all want to change the world. But when you talk about destruction, don't you know that you can count me out."'' -[[wikipedia:The_Beatles\|Lennon/McCartney]]</blockquote>In a modern [[democratic]] [[capitalist]] [[society]], even when many [[institutions]] are run by oligarchs, there are always still non-violent ways for the people to enact their will when they unite behind a popular [[idea]]. [[Progress]] can easily be opposed when support is 50% or less. Once a supermajority consensus is reached, things are still able to happen. [[Social media]] has caused us to move away from consensus building and focus more on motivating and agitating the existing base of support around issues. Our reliance on this [[technology]] allows oligarchs to use the [[algorithm]] to maintain the 50/50 division on most issues. We must get offline and return to peer-to-peer [[persuasion]] in person.<blockquote>''"Those who make peaceful resolution impossible make violent revolution [[inevitable]]"'' -[[wikipedia:John_F._Kennedy\|John F. Kennedy]]</blockquote>[[Democracy\|Democracies]] can still enact the will of the majority. It only seems [[like]] they can't because we haven't been able to reach a [[wikipedia:Tipping_point_(sociology)\|tipping point]] on a new consensus about our vision for the [[future]], allowing those who [[profit]] from the status quo to easily divide us. However, the oligarchs are also aware that violence is terrible for [[profits]], and will usually refrain from escalating conflicts to that point. They don't want to make peaceful revolution impossible, just slightly less difficult than violent revolution.		[[File:Revolution-protest-angry-mob-torches-evolution-incrementalism.jpg\|thumb\|Cathartic but less effective than talking to people]]A lot of people claim to want a revolution because they fail to see a viable path to a [[just]] [[political]] and [[economic]] system based on the current state of affairs.<blockquote>''"You say you want a revolution. Well, you know, we all want to change the world. But when you talk about destruction, don't you know that you can count me out."'' -[[wikipedia:The_Beatles\|Lennon/McCartney]]</blockquote>In a modern [[democratic]] [[capitalist]] [[society]], even when many [[institutions]] are run by oligarchs, there are always still non-violent ways for the people to enact their will when they unite behind a popular [[idea]]. [[Progress]] can easily be opposed when support is 50% or less. Once a supermajority consensus is reached, things are still able to happen. [[Social media]] has caused us to move away from consensus building and focus more on motivating and agitating the existing base of support around issues. Our reliance on this [[technology]] allows oligarchs to use the [[algorithm]] to maintain the 50/50 division on most issues. We must get offline and return to peer-to-peer [[persuasion]] in person.<blockquote>''"Those who make peaceful resolution impossible make violent revolution [[inevitable]]"'' -[[wikipedia:John_F._Kennedy\|John F. Kennedy]]</blockquote>[[Democracy\|Democracies]] can still enact the will of the majority. It only seems [[like]] they can't because we haven't been able to reach a [[wikipedia:Tipping_point_(sociology)\|tipping point]] on a new consensus about our vision for the [[future]], allowing those who [[profit]] from the status quo to easily divide us. However, the oligarchs are also aware that violence is terrible for [[profits]], and will usually refrain from escalating conflicts to that point. They don't want to make peaceful revolution impossible, just slightly less difficult than violent revolution.<blockquote>''“When Tyranny becomes Law, Rebellion becomes Duty”'' -[[wikipedia:Thomas_Jefferson\|Thomas Jefferson]]</blockquote>Practicing the power of persuasion, peaceful protest, political praxis, and populist partnerships, can [[probably]] prevent pugnacious people preparing to plunge the public into pugilism.

	~~Practicing~~ the ~~power of persuasion, peaceful protest, political praxis,~~ and ~~populist partnerships~~, can [[~~probably~~]] ~~prevent pugnacious people preparing to plunge the public into pugilism~~.		If the [[injustice]] is codified and [[institutions]] have no path to reform, revolution is the only recourse. There are many innovative ways that this can be accomplished without [[violence]] if one is creative.

	== Revolutionize Revolutions ==		== Revolutionize Revolutions ==

Fractalguy: /* Revolutionize Revolutions */

2025-01-20T17:50:22Z

Revolutionize Revolutions

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:50, 20 January 2025
Line 7:		Line 7:

	# Revolution fails, [[leaders]] are killed or imprisoned. (Vast majority)		# Revolution fails, [[leaders]] are killed or imprisoned. (Vast majority)
	# Revolution fails, remaining factions resort to terrorist tactics. (IRA, ISIS, FARC, etc.)		# Revolution fails, remaining factions resort to terrorist tactics. ([[wikipedia:Irish_Republican_Army_(1922–1969)\|IRA]], [[wikipedia:Islamic_State\|ISIS]], [[wikipedia:Revolutionary_Armed_Forces_of_Colombia\|FARC]], etc.)
	# Revolution succeeds, but is unable to create a stable government. Factions vie for power, leading to long-term instability and chaos. (French Revolution, Early USSR)		# Revolution succeeds, but is unable to create a stable government. Factions vie for power, leading to long-term instability and chaos. ([[wikipedia:French_Revolution\|French Revolution]], [[wikipedia:Russian_Revolution\|Early USSR]])
	# Revolution succeeds and a new government is established. But [[authoritarian]] enforcement of revolutionary [[ideology]] simply creates a new oppressor. (Stalin, Mao, etc.)		# Revolution succeeds and a new government is established. But [[authoritarian]] enforcement of revolutionary [[ideology]] simply creates a new oppressor. ([[wikipedia:Stalinism\|Stalin]], [[wikipedia:Maoism\|Mao]], etc.)
	# Revolution succeeds and establishes a new and stable [[government]] that significantly improves the [[quality of life]] (America, India, and other colonial independence movements)		# Revolution succeeds and establishes a new and stable [[government]] that significantly improves the [[quality of life]] ([[wikipedia:American_Revolutionary_War\|America]], [[wikipedia:Indian_independence_movement\|India]], and other [[wikipedia:Decolonization\|colonial independence movements]])

	Although every revolution tries to achieve outcome #5, [[wikipedia:List_of_revolutions_and_rebellions\|only a handful of modern examples exist]] that have, and the vast majority were overthrowing an occupying, colonial force rather than established local [[power]] structures. Therefore, anyone looking to find a better system than the one we have should focus on finding alternatives to the [[traditional]] method of resorting to [[violence]].		Although every revolution tries to achieve outcome #5, [[wikipedia:List_of_revolutions_and_rebellions\|only a handful of modern examples exist]] that have, and the vast majority were overthrowing an occupying, colonial force rather than established local [[power]] structures. Therefore, anyone looking to find a better system than the one we have should focus on finding alternatives to the [[traditional]] method of resorting to [[violence]].

Fractalguy at 17:47, 20 January 2025

2025-01-20T17:47:13Z

Fractalguy: /* Evolution, Not Revolution */

2024-12-30T19:43:30Z

Evolution, Not Revolution

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:43, 30 December 2024
Line 15:		Line 15:

	== Evolution, Not Revolution ==		== Evolution, Not Revolution ==
	It is not practical nor desirable to tear down the [[institutions]] of an advanced [[society]] and attempt to rebuild them from scratch using some [[ideological]] or [[Utopia\|utopian]] model. If we look to [[history]] for examples, we find only a few examples where revolutions have not simply replaced one oppressor with another. Since the means is the ends, [[violence]] rarely provides a path to peace.		It is not practical nor desirable to tear down the [[institutions]] of an advanced [[society]] and attempt to rebuild them from scratch using some [[ideological]] or [[Utopia\|utopian]] model. If we look to [[history]] for examples, we find only a few examples where revolutions have not simply replaced one oppressor with another. Since [[Utilitarian#The Ends Are The Means\|the means are the ends]], [[violence]] rarely provides a path to peace.

	[[wikipedia:Incrementalism\|Incrementalism]] is the necessary approach to social change in modern society. This is not to say that big changes that impact many lives are not possible, but these must be achieved within the framework of [[democracy]] in order to achieve them without coercion via actual or implied violence.		[[wikipedia:Incrementalism\|Incrementalism]] is the necessary approach to social change in modern society. This is not to say that big changes that impact many lives are not possible, but these must be achieved within the framework of [[democracy]] in order to achieve them without coercion via actual or implied violence.

Fractalguy: /* Evolution, Not Revolution */

2024-12-30T19:41:42Z

Evolution, Not Revolution

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:41, 30 December 2024
Line 15:		Line 15:

	== Evolution, Not Revolution ==		== Evolution, Not Revolution ==
	It is not practical nor desirable to tear down the [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Institutions~~ institutions] of an advanced [[society]] and attempt to rebuild them from scratch using some [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Ideology~~ ideological] or [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/~~Utopia utopian] model. If we look to [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/History~~ history] for examples, we find only a few examples where revolutions have not simply replaced one oppressor with another. Since ~~[https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/The_means_is_the_ends~~ the means is the ends], [[violence]] rarely provides a path to peace.		It is not practical nor desirable to tear down the [[institutions]] of an advanced [[society]] and attempt to rebuild them from scratch using some [[ideological]] or [[Utopia\|utopian]] model. If we look to [[history]] for examples, we find only a few examples where revolutions have not simply replaced one oppressor with another. Since the means is the ends, [[violence]] rarely provides a path to peace.

	[[wikipedia:Incrementalism\|Incrementalism]] is the necessary approach to social change in modern society. This is not to say that big changes that impact many lives are not possible, but these must be achieved within the framework of [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Democracy~~ democracy] in order to achieve them without coercion via actual or implied violence.		[[wikipedia:Incrementalism\|Incrementalism]] is the necessary approach to social change in modern society. This is not to say that big changes that impact many lives are not possible, but these must be achieved within the framework of [[democracy]] in order to achieve them without coercion via actual or implied violence.

	The modern revolutionary is self-defeating. If you believe that the overthrow of modern [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Capitalism~~ capitalism] and/or [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Socialism~~ socialism] is the only way to fix the system, you can sit back with self-satisfaction, telling yourself that when the revolution happens you'll be on the front line. In the meantime you don't have to do anything because [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Democracy~~ democracy] is broken and participating in the charade is pointless. It's a way to feel like a heroic radical while doing absolutely nothing for the cause. No [[wikipedia:Praxis_(process)\|praxis]]. 0.0000% of [[communism]] has been built. [https://discoelysium.fandom.com/wiki/Communists]		The modern revolutionary is self-defeating. If you believe that the overthrow of modern [[capitalism]] and/or [[socialism]] is the only way to fix the system, you can sit back with self-satisfaction, telling yourself that when the revolution happens you'll be on the front line. In the meantime you don't have to do anything because [[democracy]] is broken and participating in the charade is pointless. It's a way to feel like a heroic radical while doing absolutely nothing for the cause. No [[wikipedia:Praxis_(process)\|praxis]]. 0.0000% of [[communism]] has been built. [https://discoelysium.fandom.com/wiki/Communists]

	Voting for someone who promises to break the system is similarly fraught. We need a remodel, not a wrecking ball. You want a nicer house than the one you got, but you're going to hire a demolition crew to get it? Find a general contractor that knows what they are doing and if there are some parts that need a tear down they can sub that out. The guys with sledge hammers will only leave you rubble.		Voting for someone who promises to break the system is similarly fraught. We need a remodel, not a wrecking ball. You want a nicer house than the one you got, but you're going to hire a demolition crew to get it? Find a general contractor that knows what they are doing and if there are some parts that need a tear down they can sub that out. The guys with sledge hammers will only leave you rubble.

	Change can happen in [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Democracy~~ democracy] if people focus attention and build consensus one issue at a time. The most effective protest movements in recent (American) history--[[wikipedia:Civil_rights_movement\|civil rights]], [[wikipedia:Opposition_to_United_States_involvement_in_the_Vietnam_War\|Vietnam]], [[wikipedia:Environmental_movement\|environmentalism]], [[wikipedia:LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States\|LGBTQ+ rights]], [[wikipedia:Occupy_Wall_Street\|Occupy Wall Street]], [[wikipedia:Black_Lives_Matter\|Black Lives Matter]], etc., have all created long-term conversations about a single issue until the public awareness and opinion shifted dramatically. [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/~~Rage While we are all sick of complacence, we must still be patient]. And focused, which is increasingly hard in a [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Society~~ society] [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Addicted~~ addicted] to [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Social_media~~ social media].		Change can happen in [[democracy]] if people focus attention and build consensus one issue at a time. The most effective protest movements in recent (American) history--[[wikipedia:Civil_rights_movement\|civil rights]], [[wikipedia:Opposition_to_United_States_involvement_in_the_Vietnam_War\|Vietnam]], [[wikipedia:Environmental_movement\|environmentalism]], [[wikipedia:LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States\|LGBTQ+ rights]], [[wikipedia:Occupy_Wall_Street\|Occupy Wall Street]], [[wikipedia:Black_Lives_Matter\|Black Lives Matter]], etc., have all created long-term conversations about a single issue until the public awareness and opinion shifted dramatically. [[Rage\|While we are all sick of complacence, we must still be patient]]. And focused, which is increasingly hard in a [[society]] [[addicted]] to [[social media]].

	This approach also has the advantage of actually appealing to a majority of people, unlike any major revolutionary upheaval which will only ever attract a radical minority. Broad consensus can be built around the incrementalistic approach in the same way that we broadly agree with democracy, regardless of who we choose to vote for. If we build a sustained movement to raise awareness of why we need [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Democracy~~ democracy], [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Balance_of_power~~ balance of power], [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Trust~~ trust] in [~~https://www.metaculture.net/metawiki/Institutions~~ institutions], and the possibilities of consistent, incremental change, we can get people to stop thinking about breaking the system and to start working on fixing it.		This approach also has the advantage of actually appealing to a majority of people, unlike any major revolutionary upheaval which will only ever attract a radical minority. Broad consensus can be built around the incrementalistic approach in the same way that we broadly agree with democracy, regardless of who we choose to vote for. If we build a sustained movement to raise awareness of why we need [[democracy]], [[balance of power]], [[trust]] in [[institutions]], and the possibilities of consistent, incremental change, we can get people to stop thinking about breaking the system and to start working on fixing it.

	{{#ev:youtube\|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbHKbL_2JpE\|\|center\|Evolution, Not Revolution Revolution\|frame}}		{{#ev:youtube\|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbHKbL_2JpE\|\|center\|Evolution, Not Revolution Revolution\|frame}}

Fractalguy at 19:38, 30 December 2024

2024-12-30T19:38:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:38, 30 December 2024
Line 28:		Line 28:

	{{#ev:youtube\|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbHKbL_2JpE\|\|center\|Evolution, Not Revolution Revolution\|frame}}		{{#ev:youtube\|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbHKbL_2JpE\|\|center\|Evolution, Not Revolution Revolution\|frame}}

	~~== Breaking the Two-Party System ==~~
	In America, the two-party system seems to have created an insurmountably entrenched neoliberal establishment. This is one of the most common reasons given by those who choose not to participate in [[democracy]] and instead patiently wait for someone else to start a revolution.

	What we often fail to realize is that the actual parties are made up of a handful of local volunteers in every locality across the nation. If a different handful of like-minded people who want to move the country in a particular direction simply join their local party [[organizations]], they can quickly gain a majority and hence determine the future direction of that party.

	We have already seen this happen in the Republican party, with the Tea Party of the Obama years moving them significantly towards [[libertarianism]] and anti-establishmentarianism, and then the MAGA movement taking over a few years later. The Republican party is completely different today because handfuls of highly motivated people across many localities joined their local party [[organizations]] and voted to change its direction.

	Now, what if the ''sane'' people did that? Granted it's more difficult because they tend to have more friends, [[family]] that talks to them, and generally richer lives that leave less time for volunteering at the local precinct. [[Political]] [[grifters]] make this stuff their job, how can people with real jobs compete?

	Before we can implement structural changes like ranked choice voting, banning gerrymandering, getting rid of the electoral college, and others that would fundamentally change the two-party [[balance of power]], we must start by taking over the local party apparatuses and filling them with people who support these policies. If we don't have enough volunteers yet to accomplish this, then we need to have one-on-one conversations to spread this [[meme]] until we do.

	In this video, [https://www.youtube.com/@TheAdamConover Adam Conover] makes a similar point. Civic [[organizations]], [[unions]], and party participation used to be how [[progress]] got made. We need to rebuild these [[communities]] to take the 2-party system back from the oligarchs.
	~~{{#ev:youtube\|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKgNrshVdMw\|\|center\|The Secret History Behind Why the Dems Keep Losing\|frame}}~~
	~~<br>~~
	~~Duverger's Law explains why first-past-the-post voting results in 2-party dominance.~~
	~~{{#ev:youtube\|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpBRGXK-QNs\|\|center\|Duverger's Law and the Two-Party System Explained\|frame}}~~

	== Songs of the Revolution ==		== Songs of the Revolution ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:48, 16 February 2025
Line 17:		Line 17:
	It is not practical nor desirable to tear down the [[institutions]] of an advanced [[society]] and attempt to rebuild them from scratch using some [[ideological]] or [[Utopia\|utopian]] model. If we look to [[history]] for examples, we find only a few examples where revolutions have not simply replaced one oppressor with another. Since [[Utilitarian#The Ends Are The Means\|the means are the ends]], [[violence]] rarely provides a path to [[peace]].		It is not practical nor desirable to tear down the [[institutions]] of an advanced [[society]] and attempt to rebuild them from scratch using some [[ideological]] or [[Utopia\|utopian]] model. If we look to [[history]] for examples, we find only a few examples where revolutions have not simply replaced one oppressor with another. Since [[Utilitarian#The Ends Are The Means\|the means are the ends]], [[violence]] rarely provides a path to [[peace]].

	[[wikipedia:Incrementalism\|Incrementalism]] is the [[necessary]] approach to [[social]] change in modern society. This is not to say that big changes that impact many lives are not possible, but these must be achieved within the framework of [[democracy]] in order to achieve them without coercion via actual or implied violence.		[[wikipedia:Incrementalism\|Incrementalism]] is the [[necessary]] approach to [[social]] change in modern society. This is not to say that big changes that impact many lives are not possible, but these must be achieved within the framework of [[democracy]] in order to achieve them without [[authoritarian]] coercion via actual or implied violence.

	The modern revolutionary is self-defeating. If you [[believe]] that the overthrow of modern [[capitalism]] and/or [[socialism]] is the only way to fix the system, you can sit back with self-satisfaction, telling yourself that when the revolution happens you'll be on the front line. In the meantime you don't have to do anything because [[democracy]] is broken and participating in the charade is pointless. It's a way to feel like a heroic radical while doing absolutely nothing for the cause. No [[wikipedia:Praxis_(process)\|praxis]]. 0.0000% of [[communism]] has been built. [https://discoelysium.fandom.com/wiki/Communists]		The modern revolutionary is self-defeating. If you [[believe]] that the overthrow of modern [[capitalism]] and/or [[socialism]] is the only way to fix the system, you can sit back with self-satisfaction, telling yourself that when the revolution happens you'll be on the front line. In the meantime you don't have to do anything because [[democracy]] is broken and participating in the charade is pointless. It's a way to feel like a heroic radical while doing absolutely nothing for the cause. No [[wikipedia:Praxis_(process)\|praxis]]. 0.0000% of [[communism]] has been built. [https://discoelysium.fandom.com/wiki/Communists]

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:47, 20 January 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Revolution-protest-angry-mob-torches-evolution-incrementalism.jpg\|thumb\|Cathartic but less effective than talking to people]]A lot of people claim to want a revolution because they fail to see a viable path to a [[just]] [[political]] and [[economic]] system based on the current state of affairs.<blockquote>''"You say you want a revolution. Well, you know, we all want to change the world. But when you talk about destruction, don't you know that you can count me out."'' -Lennon/McCartney</blockquote>In a modern [[democratic]] [[capitalist]] [[society]], even when many [[institutions]] are run by oligarchs, there are always still non-violent ways for the people to enact their will when they unite behind a popular idea. [[Progress]] can easily be opposed when support is 50% or less. Once a supermajority consensus is reached, things are still able to happen. [[Social media]] has caused us to move away from consensus building and focus more on motivating and agitating the existing base of support around issues. Our reliance on this [[technology]] allows oligarchs to use the [[algorithm]] to maintain the 50/50 division on most issues. We must get offline and return to peer-to-peer [[persuasion]] in person.<blockquote>''"Those who make peaceful resolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable"'' -John F. Kennedy</blockquote>[[Democracy\|Democracies]] can still enact the will of the majority. It only seems like they can't because we haven't been able to reach a [[wikipedia:Tipping_point_(sociology)\|tipping point]] on a new consensus about our vision for the [[future]], allowing those who profit from the status quo to easily divide us. However, the oligarchs are also aware that violence is terrible for profits, and will usually refrain from escalating conflicts to that point. They don't want to make peaceful revolution impossible, just slightly less difficult than violent revolution.		[[File:Revolution-protest-angry-mob-torches-evolution-incrementalism.jpg\|thumb\|Cathartic but less effective than talking to people]]A lot of people claim to want a revolution because they fail to see a viable path to a [[just]] [[political]] and [[economic]] system based on the current state of affairs.<blockquote>''"You say you want a revolution. Well, you know, we all want to change the world. But when you talk about destruction, don't you know that you can count me out."'' -[[wikipedia:The_Beatles\|Lennon/McCartney]]</blockquote>In a modern [[democratic]] [[capitalist]] [[society]], even when many [[institutions]] are run by oligarchs, there are always still non-violent ways for the people to enact their will when they unite behind a popular [[idea]]. [[Progress]] can easily be opposed when support is 50% or less. Once a supermajority consensus is reached, things are still able to happen. [[Social media]] has caused us to move away from consensus building and focus more on motivating and agitating the existing base of support around issues. Our reliance on this [[technology]] allows oligarchs to use the [[algorithm]] to maintain the 50/50 division on most issues. We must get offline and return to peer-to-peer [[persuasion]] in person.<blockquote>''"Those who make peaceful resolution impossible make violent revolution [[inevitable]]"'' -[[wikipedia:John_F._Kennedy\|John F. Kennedy]]</blockquote>[[Democracy\|Democracies]] can still enact the will of the majority. It only seems [[like]] they can't because we haven't been able to reach a [[wikipedia:Tipping_point_(sociology)\|tipping point]] on a new consensus about our vision for the [[future]], allowing those who [[profit]] from the status quo to easily divide us. However, the oligarchs are also aware that violence is terrible for [[profits]], and will usually refrain from escalating conflicts to that point. They don't want to make peaceful revolution impossible, just slightly less difficult than violent revolution.

	Practicing the power of persuasion, peaceful protest, political praxis, and populist partnerships, can probably prevent pugnacious people preparing to plunge the public into pugilism.		Practicing the power of persuasion, peaceful protest, political praxis, and populist partnerships, can [[probably]] prevent pugnacious people preparing to plunge the public into pugilism.

	== Revolutionize Revolutions ==		== Revolutionize Revolutions ==
	Historically, revolutions have led to one of the following outcomes:		[[Historically]], revolutions have led to one of the following outcomes:

	# Revolution fails, leaders are killed or imprisoned. (Vast majority)		# Revolution fails, [[leaders]] are killed or imprisoned. (Vast majority)
	# Revolution fails, remaining factions resort to terrorist tactics. (IRA, ISIS, FARC, etc.)		# Revolution fails, remaining factions resort to terrorist tactics. (IRA, ISIS, FARC, etc.)
	# Revolution succeeds, but is unable to create a stable government. Factions vie for power, leading to long-term instability and chaos. (French Revolution, Early USSR)		# Revolution succeeds, but is unable to create a stable government. Factions vie for power, leading to long-term instability and chaos. (French Revolution, Early USSR)
Line 15:		Line 15:

	== Evolution, Not Revolution ==		== Evolution, Not Revolution ==
	It is not practical nor desirable to tear down the [[institutions]] of an advanced [[society]] and attempt to rebuild them from scratch using some [[ideological]] or [[Utopia\|utopian]] model. If we look to [[history]] for examples, we find only a few examples where revolutions have not simply replaced one oppressor with another. Since [[Utilitarian#The Ends Are The Means\|the means are the ends]], [[violence]] rarely provides a path to peace.		It is not practical nor desirable to tear down the [[institutions]] of an advanced [[society]] and attempt to rebuild them from scratch using some [[ideological]] or [[Utopia\|utopian]] model. If we look to [[history]] for examples, we find only a few examples where revolutions have not simply replaced one oppressor with another. Since [[Utilitarian#The Ends Are The Means\|the means are the ends]], [[violence]] rarely provides a path to [[peace]].

	[[wikipedia:Incrementalism\|Incrementalism]] is the necessary approach to social change in modern society. This is not to say that big changes that impact many lives are not possible, but these must be achieved within the framework of [[democracy]] in order to achieve them without coercion via actual or implied violence.		[[wikipedia:Incrementalism\|Incrementalism]] is the [[necessary]] approach to [[social]] change in modern society. This is not to say that big changes that impact many lives are not possible, but these must be achieved within the framework of [[democracy]] in order to achieve them without coercion via actual or implied violence.

	The modern revolutionary is self-defeating. If you believe that the overthrow of modern [[capitalism]] and/or [[socialism]] is the only way to fix the system, you can sit back with self-satisfaction, telling yourself that when the revolution happens you'll be on the front line. In the meantime you don't have to do anything because [[democracy]] is broken and participating in the charade is pointless. It's a way to feel like a heroic radical while doing absolutely nothing for the cause. No [[wikipedia:Praxis_(process)\|praxis]]. 0.0000% of [[communism]] has been built. [https://discoelysium.fandom.com/wiki/Communists]		The modern revolutionary is self-defeating. If you [[believe]] that the overthrow of modern [[capitalism]] and/or [[socialism]] is the only way to fix the system, you can sit back with self-satisfaction, telling yourself that when the revolution happens you'll be on the front line. In the meantime you don't have to do anything because [[democracy]] is broken and participating in the charade is pointless. It's a way to feel like a heroic radical while doing absolutely nothing for the cause. No [[wikipedia:Praxis_(process)\|praxis]]. 0.0000% of [[communism]] has been built. [https://discoelysium.fandom.com/wiki/Communists]

	Voting for someone who promises to break the system is similarly fraught. We need a remodel, not a wrecking ball. You want a nicer house than the one you got, but you're going to hire a demolition crew to get it? Find a general contractor that knows what they are doing and if there are some parts that need a tear down they can sub that out. The guys with sledge hammers will only leave you rubble.		Voting for someone who promises to break the system is similarly fraught. We need a remodel, not a wrecking ball. You want a nicer house than the one you got, but you're going to hire a demolition crew to get it? Find a general contractor that knows what they are doing and if there are some parts that need a tear down they can sub that out. The guys with sledge hammers will only leave you rubble.

	Change can happen in [[democracy]] if people focus attention and build consensus one issue at a time. The most effective protest movements in recent (American) history--[[wikipedia:Civil_rights_movement\|civil rights]], [[wikipedia:Opposition_to_United_States_involvement_in_the_Vietnam_War\|Vietnam]], [[wikipedia:Environmental_movement\|environmentalism]], [[wikipedia:LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States\|LGBTQ+ rights]], [[wikipedia:Occupy_Wall_Street\|Occupy Wall Street]], [[wikipedia:Black_Lives_Matter\|Black Lives Matter]], etc., have all created long-term conversations about a single issue until the public awareness and opinion shifted dramatically. [[Rage\|While we are all sick of complacence, we must still be patient]]. And focused, which is increasingly hard in a [[society]] [[addicted]] to [[social media]].		Change can happen in [[democracy]] if people focus attention and build consensus one issue at a [[time]]. The most effective protest movements in recent (American) history--[[wikipedia:Civil_rights_movement\|civil rights]], [[wikipedia:Opposition_to_United_States_involvement_in_the_Vietnam_War\|Vietnam]], [[wikipedia:Environmental_movement\|environmentalism]], [[wikipedia:LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States\|LGBTQ+ rights]], [[wikipedia:Occupy_Wall_Street\|Occupy Wall Street]], [[wikipedia:Black_Lives_Matter\|Black Lives Matter]], etc., have all created long-term conversations about a single issue until the public awareness and opinion shifted dramatically. [[Rage\|While we are all sick of complacence, we must still be patient]]. And focused, which is increasingly hard in a [[society]] [[addicted]] to [[social media]].

	This approach also has the advantage of actually appealing to a majority of people, unlike any major revolutionary upheaval which will only ever attract a radical minority. Broad consensus can be built around the incrementalistic approach in the same way that we broadly agree with democracy, regardless of who we choose to vote for. If we build a sustained movement to raise awareness of why we need [[democracy]], [[balance of power]], [[trust]] in [[institutions]], and the possibilities of consistent, incremental change, we can get people to stop thinking about breaking the system and to start working on fixing it.		This approach also has the advantage of actually appealing to a majority of people, unlike any major revolutionary upheaval which will only ever attract a radical minority. Broad consensus can be built around the incrementalistic approach in the same way that we broadly agree with democracy, regardless of who we choose to vote for. If we build a sustained movement to raise awareness of why we need [[democracy]], [[balance of power]], [[trust]] in [[institutions]], and the possibilities of consistent, incremental change, we can get people to stop thinking about breaking the system and to start [[working]] on fixing it.

	{{#ev:youtube\|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbHKbL_2JpE\|\|center\|Evolution, Not Revolution Revolution\|frame}}		{{#ev:youtube\|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbHKbL_2JpE\|\|center\|Evolution, Not Revolution Revolution\|frame}}