Pages:

Author

Topic: why revolutions and movements fail at their desired outcome (Read 462 times)

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

The biggest reason why revolutions and movements fail is, election rigging. The real question is, if they found ballots where a printer printed the election direction on multiple ballots, why would they need a new audit? If 20 audits find that the election was rigged, are they simply going after audit 21? Why not a new election, instead, because they have shown the first election was manipulated?

Georgia: Election authority finds photocopied ballots, pushes for new audit

Quote from: https://thebl.tv/us-news/georgia-election-authority-finds-photocopied-ballots-pushes-for-new-audit.html

Her statement should lead a federal judge to order a new audit.

The chief election official, Suzi Voyles, said she noticed very unusual similarities with large numbers of ballots during the election night recount, which caused her to look more closely. She said they all appeared to be identical photocopies of votes in favor of Democratic candidate Joe Biden, the Western Journal reported.

Voyles testified that each ballot contained evenly filled ovals, and each had an identical crescent-shaped "void" inside them, indicating that the ballots were not filled in with pencil or pen but with toner ink, she said.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

lets just use another example as it seems somes only reading half a history book and arguing about what he read rather than the big picture of this topic

so right now in the tigray region of ethiopia.. 2million people are displaced out of 7million
an election was held in november and the previous government are dismissing it
300k people are in famine due to purposefully stopping food transports to an area

..
meanwhile hundreds of thousands of people around the world are spending $10-$50 on their placard and picnic protests

imagine it $1-5mill being spent on placards to do with another country in famine. but $0 of that placard money.. $0.. zero ends up buying a single bottle of water for those in famine.

yea american protest it. and some dude that owns a woodshop is making mega bucks selling wood placards. but is he really actually helping solve the famine in ethiopia.. nah.

american defense and 3leter branches already know about the tigray struggles. so. placards and picnics are doing nothing.

even unicef is making megabucks providing aid.

but here is the thing
those people in Ethiopia wont get food any faster if they just stood on the streets with placards.
what they need to do is organise the community.
find out who is a truck driver. who owns a truck. and then organise locating and getting food for themselves.
even if it means crossing borders.

they need to come to some agreement with the government to find a peaceful resolution.
again this is not stand on the street with a placard
its actually pen to paper. make a list of both demands. and 'wants' and what they can offer in return

petition it. get signatures to show its a big enough deal. EG 300000 signatures of starving people.(too many to arrest or shoot)

placards and chanting fall on death ears..
which normally end up turning into unorganised chaos of guns and killing.
but smart decisive pen to paper petitions is the faster yet calmer rout to resolutions

OgNasty

donator

Activity: 4760

Merit: 4323

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

A lot of time movements fail because of focusing on individuals instead of the movement. This was something that satoshi feared and was a big part of why he constantly looked for ways to reward those who engaged while staying anonymous. I believe if satoshi was discovered with concrete evidence, regardless of who he was or what his past was, horrible things would be said about him. Narratives would be thought up to discredit him and make his invention appear self-serving. They would find people from his past to make claims about him and harass him into no longer wanting to work on the project. That's what people do... In dying as an anonymous figure, satoshi saved the community from having to deal with this drama and allowed Bitcoin to dodge what would have been a helpless attack vector.

Sometimes we have to focus on the idea and tune out the noise. This is hard, because less intelligent people focus on individuals and they are the majority. I stand by the belief that we should focus on ideas, be aware of events, and for the most part ignore people.

TwitchySeal

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 2093

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: Gyfts on June 10, 2021, 01:45:36 PM

Problem is today, most "revolutionists" don't have the same passion. They rally behind something no one cares about.

I mean, we're kinda going through one of the largest movements in modern history. It's ok to disagree with it, but think about how silly it is to say that nobody cares about the thing that ~20 million Americans (and millions more globally) are protesting... Not trying to get in another BLM argument with you, our views are irrelevant to my point. People do care about it.

Quote from: franky1 on June 10, 2021, 01:58:02 PM

but this tea event. was not the sole trigger/response to cause the civil war/revolution. it was just the media story to hide the true causes

You keep implying that I said it was. This is the second or third time. Knock it off please. I didn't say that and I've never heard anyone make that claim. And the Civil War was almost 100 years later.

Quote from: franky1 on June 07, 2021, 06:36:27 PM

but hey if you think throwing 3 ships load of tea boxes into the sea was the only and sole cause of a civil war. maybe your missing a few pieces of critical info in the middle

I don't. Of course I don't. Please don't do that, lets have an honest conversation.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

ok well you keep thinking 'unifying many voices as one' =throwing tea in the sea = the way to go...

meanwhile other people can unify in the legal system of actual petitions and resolutions and govern their area.

what you fail to see is
the tea party was just a group of men peed off that britain was selling tea cheaper than the blackmarket tea from other countries.
they also didnt like it when england was selling tea to cough 'pirates' cough who then sold indian tea as blackmarket tea for a premiium.

but this tea event. was not the sole trigger/response to cause the civil war/revolution. it was just the media story to hide the true causes

the tea party was october-dec 73.... where by they dunked the tea in december 73 after giving the captain a month..
a whole year later of nothing. no gunshots no battles no wars...
(thus non event)

then congress was formed and a petition was sent. sept 74
thats when the real drama unfolded. and within 5 months. britain backed down feb 75
when britain sent out the conciliatory resolution as a display of repealing the old acts

so if you want to play around and think that tealeaf soaking of 73 causes wars in 75.. you are reading the wrong stories

you are forgetting alot of detail in between

its a nice story to tell the kids '100 americans dunked tea in the sea and freed america'
but thats BS
look at the resolutions, petitions, formal representatives of legal matters and acts that occured behind the headlines

Gyfts

legendary

Activity: 2828

Merit: 1515

Quote from: TwitchySeal on June 10, 2021, 12:33:59 PM

...

Ahh, the Boston Tea Party, one of my favorite American historical events because of the pettiness and successful retaliation against the British. Do not mess with the brits and their tea was the moral of the story, but also do not mess with Americans and their freedom.

Problem is today, most "revolutionists" don't have the same passion. They rally behind something no one cares about.

TwitchySeal

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 2093

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: franky1 on June 08, 2021, 04:06:28 AM

There were 3 or 4 (depending on if count the Quebec Act) Intolerable Acts (as in the Americans wouldn't tolerate them) that were a direct response to the Boston Tea Party.

The first one completely shut down Boston Harbor and ordered British troops to patrol the water and surrounding land to make sure no Colonists were allowed to import or export any of their goods overseas and ordered the colonists to pay for the Tea they threw in the harbor and compensate the tea company (owned by England) for all lost revenue.

The second one revoked the charter that allowed Massachusetts to somewhat govern itself. They were no longer allowed to elect any local officials, they would all be appointed by the King instead. They weren't even allowed to hold any sort of regular town meeting anymore.

The third allowed British Officers to stand trial in England rather than America. Basically a get out of jail free card for British troops and appointed officials to do whatever they wanted without having to worry about being judged in America.

Quote from: franky1 on June 08, 2021, 04:06:28 AM

thats where your first story ended

This isn't my story, it's literally the history of America.

England passed these acts hoping to stop any future protests. As you know, that plan backfired. The Intolerable Acts are what ultimately unified the 13 Colonies and persuaded enough Colonists to turn on Britain and by Fall 1774 (the Tea Party was in December) each Colony sent delegates to Philly for the first Continental Congress where they agreed to stand together against England. If England wouldn't repeal all coercive acts, then all 13 colonies would boycott all English goods in protest. I think this is where the petition you mentioned was drawn up, they called it the Continental Association.

King George basically said 'oh hell no' and, because of the second intolerable act (see above), Massachusetts was the place he decided to hold his ground (the other colonies still had some degree of independence, but he had declared MA basically part of England.) In Spring of 1775 that's where the first shots were fired and the war began. Without the support of the other 12 colonies, there's little doubt Massachusetts would've had a chance, they probably wouldn't have bothered to fight and just given in. But because the colonies were united and willing to fight for the same cause and each other, that's not what happened.

Unifying many voices as one is what makes protests effective. They make others aware of an issue they may not have known about, and if enough people agree - no government has any choice but to listen. The Boston Tea Party wasn't a huge protest, but it was a catalyst for the Revolutionary War, which was in itself - just one big protest. A revolution that did not fail at realizing it's desired outcome.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

whats next..
badecker buys a placard and stores it in his basement
'i protested' [never left basement]

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: franky1 on June 10, 2021, 06:51:40 AM

your grammatical knitpick would have been more noted if you tried to distance yourself from the 'we' by saying you didnt mean yourself you meant US/humans in general

but you decided to embarrass yourself by trying to change your sentence to make it sound like your saying 'we got the vaccine' instead of 'we got vaccinated'
however even if you were to say 'we got the vaccine' the implication/meaning still ends up being the same thing
because when i say i 'got the vaccine'. i dont mean they handed me a vial i store in my fridge. i mean i was vaccinated

... in hand, still in the box. Cool

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

sorry folks about badeckers usual trolling.
if only politicians were easy to rebutt

anyways
back to the subject.
if you wipe away all the media printed social drama of protests. and actually look into the big details of lobbying, petitions, lawsuits and even political bribes. you start to realise that society only changes with these mentioned things and not due to placards and picnics

so people need to actually start using these methods and not just waste time organising picnics/chants

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: franky1 on June 09, 2021, 06:13:53 PM

Quote from: BADecker on June 08, 2021, 06:27:57 PM

^^^ We got Covid and the vaxx from Fauci through some roundabout method like this.
Cool

you got covid and the vaxx

so you got vaccinated after all... well thanks for that admission.
now you can get on with your life and stop pretending your an anti vaxxer

Standard for you... can't tell the difference between vaxx and vaxxinated.

And even more standard that you flaunt it.

Cool

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

Quote from: BADecker on June 08, 2021, 06:27:57 PM

^^^ We got Covid and the vaxx from Fauci through some roundabout method like this.
Cool

you got covid and the vaxx

so you got vaccinated after all... well thanks for that admission.
now you can get on with your life and stop pretending your an anti vaxxer

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

^^^ We got Covid and the vaxx from Fauci through some roundabout method like this.

Cool

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

you were talking about the reaction to the boston tea party(342 boxes of tea thrown in the sea)
britain did send more tea and stil demanded more taxes. which even you noted as the intolerant acts

thats where your first story ended

funny thing is. the response was not britain going to america with placards and picnic blankets.
they made LAWS as their reaction (yep laws change things more then placards).. but not positive laws that helped america.. negative laws (hint protests dont work)

what you will see is that part of the intolerable acts was to have the british parliament make acts to 'own' the ports and demand payment further. basically you wont get your tea unless you pay the tax first.
(1774:£9k = 2020: $1m)
ill call this the tax blackmail part of my summary of 'demand more tax'
and then they sent tea via other methods
ill call this the bait and switch part of my summary of 'send more tea'

ill concede and explain my summary better in regards to bait and switch.. it was no longer britain -> india->britain-> america during this march+1774 event of the intolerable acts
where britain bought tea from india. india sent tea via britain to america. via official channels

but instead britain-> india->'pirates'->america
you got to remember america still got tea from 'east india tea company' (aka britain) but just not the official way
but britain (parliament) still fought for taxes from that tea journey coz they 'own the ports'
hint: most 'pirates' were british. indian tea company was british empire owned thus still britain sending tea
(but shhh, dont tell the colonists)

.. and just to add a lil more salt to the tea..
when britain sent the new acts to america. they sent it with tea and there 30 boxes of tea also got dumped
but hey now im really knit picking details.

hense my summarising 'britain still sent tea and demanded taxes'
maybe i should have explained ELI-5 rather than to ask to look deeper. i just thought some people would look deeper and connect the dots

anyway.
throwing 342 boxes off 3 boats oct 1773. did not win america any favours. so the 'protest' didnt help
what did help is the petitions and legal stuff .. but it seems we are skipping ahead of where you are at in your research
so ill slow down, and try to not summarise too much.
but the american response in september 1774 of forming congress petitioning the monarchy led to britain conceding in feb 1775 and reducing their handling and demands on america.. but it seems im skipping ahead
ill wait for you to catch up to all the dots that led to
concillatory resolution oops i mean 'response to the petition of the monarchy'
[spoiler] it was not 342 boxes of tea dumping=war/peace.

TwitchySeal

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 2093

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: franky1 on June 07, 2021, 06:36:27 PM

it is a lil funny how your version of events stopped at the tealeaf soaking and intolerable acts part... and you refrained from including any of the things about congress petitions to monarchy and other things.

To be clear, are you saying the petitions to the Monarchy were effective despite the Revolutionary War happening?

Quote from: franky1 on June 07, 2021, 06:36:27 PM

but hey if you think throwing 3 ships load of tea boxes into the sea was the only and sole cause of a civil war. maybe your missing a few pieces of critical info in the middle

I don't. Of course I don't. Please don't do that, lets have an honest conversation.

Quote from: franky1 on June 07, 2021, 06:36:27 PM

also funny how you feel the teaparty event of soaking tealeaves in the ocean caused positive change of laws.. whilst admitting that it was the opposite and ignored and caused a war instead.. which just sounds like flipfloping to me..

No, I'm not flip flopping. I think protests ~~are~~ can be an effective way to make change, you don't. Whether the change is positive or not, well, that's an entirely different argument. I'm sure we could find a bunch of protests throughout history and agree that they had negative results and were a bad idea/negative for the world from the beginning. I'm only arguing that civilian protests can be, and have been, an effective way to cause change and strongly against your view that they do nothing at all.

Quote

so. REAL history is
citizens and Whigs threw boxes in the sea. britain sent more boxes and demanded more taxes..
^summary of where your post ends
then
13 colonies got together and formed the first session of congress and petitioned the monarchy
then parliament backtracked

No, Britian didn't just send more boxes and demand more taxes. They passed the "The Boston Port Act" where they basically shut down Boston Harbor (That was a really big deal). This is the actual text from the act. It's not media, revisionist or sensationalized by anyone. It's Englands literal response to the Boston Tea Party, 3 months after the incident (remember people had to sail across the ocean back then), and six months before the first continental congress:

Quote

The Boston Port Act

(March 31, 1774)

AN ACT to discontinue, in such manner, and for or such time as are therein mentioned, the landing and discharging, lading or shipping, of goods, wares, and merchandise, at the town, and within the harbour, of Boston, in the province of Massachuset's Bay, in North America.

WHEREAS dangerous commotions and insurrections have been fomented and raised in the town of Boston, in the province of Massachuset's Bay, in New England, by divers ill affected persons, to the subversion of his Majesty's government, and to the utter destruction of the publick peace, and good order of the said town; in which commotions and insurrections certain valuable cargoes of teas, being the property of the East India Company, and on board certain' vessels Iying within the bay or harbour of Boston, were seized and destroyed: And whereas, in the present condition of the said town and harbour, the commerce of his Majesty's subjects cannot be safely carried on there, nor the customs payable to his Majesty duly collected; and it is therefore expedient that the officers of his Majesty's customs should be forthwith removed from the said town: ... be it enacted ..., That from and after June 1, 1774, it shall not be lawful for any person or persons whatsoever to lade, put, or cause to procure to be laden or put, off or from any quay, wharf, or other place, within the said town of Boston, or in or upon any part of the shore of the bay, commonly called The Harbour of Boston, between a certain headland or point called Nahant Point, on the eastern side of the entrance into the said bay, and a certain other headland or point called Alderton Point, on the western side of the entrance into the said bay, or in or upon any island, creek, landing place, bank, or other place, within the said bay or headlands, into any ship, vessel, lighter, boat, or bottom, any goods, wares, or merchandise whatsoever, to be transported or carried into any other country, province, or place whatsoever, or into any other part of the said province of the Massachuset's Bay, in New England; or to take up, discharge, or lay on land, ... within the said town, or in or upon any of the places aforesaid, out of any boat, ... any goods, wares, or merchandise whatsoever, to be brought from any other country, province, or place, or any other part of the said province of the Massachuset's Bay in New England, upon pain of the forfeiture of the said goods, ... merchandise, and of the said boat, ... and of the guns, ammunition, tackle, furniture, and stores, in or belonging to the same: And if any such goods, ... shall, within the said town, or in any the places aforesaid, be laden or taken in from the shore into any barge, ... to be carried on board any ship or vessel outward bound to any other country or province, ... or to be laden into such barge, ... from or out of any ship or vessel coming in ... from any other country, such barge, ... shall be forfeited and lost....

X. Provided also, and it is hereby declared and enacted, That nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed, to enable his Majesty to appoint such port, harbour, creeks, quays, wharfs, places, or officers, in the said town of Boston, or in the said bay or islands, until it shall sufficiently appear to his Majesty that full satisfaction hath been made by or on behalf of the inhabitants of the said town of Boston to the united company of merchants of England trading to the East Indies, for the damage sustained by the said company by the destruction of their goods sent to the said town of Boston, on board certain ships or vessels as aforesaid; and until it shall be certified to his Majesty, in council, by the governor, or lieutenant governor, of the said province, that reasonable satisfaction hath been made to the officers of his Majesty's revenue, and others, who suffered by the riots and insurrections above mentioned, in the months of November and December, in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy three, and in the month of January, in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy four.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

Quote from: TwitchySeal on June 07, 2021, 11:58:33 AM

Quote from: franky1 on June 07, 2021, 02:10:13 AM

the boston tea party events. were not where britain responded to the citizens of placard waving protests.. but instead the US government sending the british monarchy a petition (protest/resolution)

this is the legal method that got the British government to listen to the American government

What you're saying directly contradicts the consensus among historians.

There was no listening to the Colonists by the British. Instead they passed a bunch of oppressive laws in hopes to force them into submitting known as The Intolerable Acts:

Quote

The Intolerable Acts (passed/Royal assent March 31 – 22 June 1774) were punitive laws passed by the British Parliament in 1774 after the Boston Tea Party. The laws were meant to punish the Massachusetts colonists for their defiance in the Tea Party protest in reaction to changes in taxation by the British Government. In Great Britain, these laws were referred to as the Coercive Acts.

The acts took away self-governance and rights that Massachusetts had enjoyed since its founding, triggering outrage and indignation in the Thirteen Colonies. They were key developments in the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War in April 1775.

thats the entertainment newpaper headline version of events.
if you dig a lil deeper. it wont take you long

so. REAL history is
citizens and Whigs threw boxes in the sea. britain sent more boxes and demanded more taxes..
^summary of where your post ends
then
13 colonies got together and formed the first session of congress and petitioned the monarchy
then parliament backtracked

as you can see. if you tried reading things in time line order
citizen protests done nothing. as you say parliament ignored the teabox soaking events.. and just punished that defiant act..

thus proving citizen protests dont do crap.. but cause more issues(my point all along)

but then when forming congress and petitioning the monarch.. then things changed.
but seems you ended your post before you got to that part of the story

it is a lil funny how your version of events stopped at the tealeaf soaking and intolerable acts part... and you refrained from including any of the things about congress petitions to monarchy and other things.

but hey if you think throwing 3 ships load of tea boxes into the sea was the only and sole cause of a civil war. maybe your missing a few pieces of critical info in the middle

also funny how you feel the teaparty event of soaking tealeaves in the ocean caused positive change of laws.. whilst admitting that it was the opposite and ignored and caused a war instead.. which just sounds like flipfloping to me..

try to concentrate on the legal stuff happening behind the popularist new media of entertainment news about getting tealeaves wet as a form of protest

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

why revolutions and movements fail at their desired outcome

Because the losers don't have full auto assault weapons, and powerful ammo.

Cool

TwitchySeal

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 2093

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: franky1 on June 07, 2021, 02:10:13 AM

Quote

Similificator

sr. member

Activity: 882

Merit: 403

I agree with you a hundred percent. The only problem is that people are way too hot headed to think rationally nowadays. Although this may not be the case all the time, a lack of education or proper knowledge is also a huge problem. People who lack knowledge tend to do things recklessly and what's worse about this is that most of these type of people tend to close their minds to other alternatives even when sometimes, the benefits are quite obvious they do not care since it mostly hurts their egos. Another thing would be because leaders of some revolutions are paid to recruit gullible people to do useless revolutions by some political party. This is why despite better solutions being obviously out in the open, most revolutions cannot or won't even use them.