Likelihood of Revolution

Lately, with the popularity of President Bush in the low twenties, and the Supreme court tilting toward the right, and no one trusting voting results, I wonder what it would take to spark a revolution, or a coup.

The thing with history is that nothing seems likely until after it happens. So if your first reaction is to dismiss this possibility because it’s unlikely, you haven’t studied history. Everything that happens is unlikely.

So what series of events could cause an uprising? While I am not predicting it will happen, I think it’s more possible than you think. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, the following series of events unfold:

1. McCain, behind in the polls, somehow wins the nomination and the general election.

2. McCain’s win causes mistrust in voting machines, for reasons either real or imagined.

3. McCain intensifies the war in Iraq because he thinks it’s the right thing for the country.

4. Protesters take to the streets in sixties fashion. There are clashes with police. The media makes this THE story.

5. McCain, one of our oldest candidates, dies in office from natural causes. His vice president assumes the job. The vice president, chosen to appease the conservative base, is the most right wing politician ever, and makes Dick Cheney look like Bambii.

6. The new Vice President cracks down hard on protesters. He starts suspending even more civil liberties. Martial law is discussed as if it is imminent.

7. An opening on the Supreme Court allows the new president to push a conservative into the slot. This moves the court completely to the right. All abortions are banned in the United States.

8. The war in Iraq spreads to Iran, where once again, no signs of nuclear weapons production are found. This added war is so unpopular with the rest of the world that allies start withdrawing from NATO to form their own defense club.

9. Strained by the war in Iraq, and now Iran, and potentially Syria, the American economy crumbles.

Now would there be a revolution? And which part of this scenario couldn’t happen?

Comments

[sohbet]

thank youu

[sohbet]

thank you

[AnaetAltelf]

I just got an email

Who would have guessed Ameritrade? Only through the application [url=http://www.cool-trade.com/Default.asp?tda=y&MyUrl=izone]Cooltrade[/url]

Monthly subscription of $39.99 a month. No Contracts.

*For beginners, you can execute manual trades or confirmation of trades.
**Prices only valid if trades are made through the CoolTrade application.

[David Dalton]

This is all fine but we have to realize that we are alot closer to war with Iran then we think. Could this lead to and economic calase? Absoluty

[checkers]

I think a more likely scenario is for anarchy not revolution.
What would happen if several simultaneous nuclear bombs went off in NY, chicago, cleveland, LA, Seattle, Washington-DC.
Also London, Hong Kong etc.. You don't have to sneak them in in these locations, they are easily accessed by waterways from the ocean.
Imagine the communication and financial nightmares.
Economies would be ruined for decades.
Who would we bomb?
Who would decide?

[joshua]

Impossible? I guess nothing nothing is impossible.

Many of the comments here are well thought out and thought provoking. Yet there are many still that are posted with a spirit of arrogance with no attempt at engaging in a logical conversation aimed at reaching some kind of ensight, but rather to make sniping remarks aimed at shutting down dialogue and making others feel inferior.

would it be impossible for everyone, not to agree on every subject, but to agree on a logical exchange of ideas and opinions with hopes of discovering the truth or at least a consensus?

On a side note, Would it be wrong to eliminate or make illegal a practice in which human life is destroyed, such as abortion?

[Monkeydarts]

Scott asks, "Which part of this scenario couldn’t happen?
I shall answer--
1. McCain has no chance getting the nomination. He'll drop out after 6PM on the last Friday in September 2007.
2. Is void due to answer #1.
3. Is void due to answer #1.
4. Although #4 is also void it's important to note that "Protesters take to the streets in sixties fashion." won't happen because Dick Nixon ended the draft in 1971. The only reason there were 60's anti-war protests is because limpwrists/ hippies were worried about getting hurt.
5. McCain could die in office but it will be as he serves his last term as US Senator from AZ
6. Void for several reasons butmainly because most sane people know there's no suspension of civil rights going on.
7. Even if the SCOTUS reversed Roe v Wade it doesn't make abortion illegal it simply returns the decision to the states. I'm sure CA, NY and other would continue to slaughter their unborn children at the current rates.
8. Iran (Quds Force) is already attacking the coalition forces in Iraq.NATO serves little purpose so nobody should care if it disbands-- more importantly the UN should disband.
9.The American economy is strong and since the entire defense department amounts to little more than a rounding error over at the DHHS nothing as described in #9 will happen. Therefore, no revolution... but leftists will still be revolting forms of life.

[@Rob]

And AIDS grows out of control and nuclear bombs hit all around the world...that about right? heh

[y.a]

I'm not from america. I think that the scenario could happen, but i feel the american people would not resort to a revolution. I think that the american people have already given up a lot of their rights, without much fuss.

Whether its Clinton, Bush or Mcain it simply wouldn't matter foreign policy-wise. The part about THE media. If Americans are angry about Iraq, its due to the fact the death toll of americans is rising, and that its hurting their economy, but there is no death toll for Iraqi's in THE media. I hope the American people do take some action though.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

The really funny part about this is that if you were a little older, you'd remember people spinning these stories about Nixon. If you were a little older yet, you'd remember when people were saying that Roosevelt was planning the same things.

[Wade]

Orson Scott Card's Empire is a red-state vs blue-state American civil war based on the deep hatred of each other with no room for a middle ground. At the end of the audio book, the author gives his opinion of how such a war could come about with recent examples from civil wars in other countries.

[Nicole]

I sometimes wonder not whether a revolution is likely, but whether a revolution would help. Would it change the government to be more like the way I want it to be? Usually the answer is no.

I vote for a small, focused political party which seeks drastic (but peaceful) changes in the government. I still vote, even after reading about vote hacking. This is the type of thing that made me wonder what exactly would be necessary to change the government, if voting cannot be trusted.

A lot of other countries have had revolutions. And I don't see any post-revolutionary countries that have the kind of government I want.

[Wise-acres]

Two things would not happen. john McCain getting elected, even though i like him. If politics is just a giant popularity contest, then i predict that Giuliani or Clinton will win. Then again, Bill Clinton came out of nowhere and won........ The second is the economy crashing. A. Milatary spending is below 4 percent of the U.S ecomony (ref thru the cia world fact book, at cia.gov, great site for stats). B. too many people have too much invested to let the economy crumble (but of defn of the economy crumbling could be different). Japan has debt of 176% of it GDP, vs about 76% in the US. Lot of stuff you here are scare tatics by people that know you dont know what these numbers mean.
I read an article not to long ago, stating that statistically, that chief justices political beliefs do not affect his decisions. although i can see how the normal person does not percieve it that way.

[DaveR]

>All abortions are banned in the United States.

Few things are more blatantly stupid than people who sit around and opine things like this. I'm guessing you have no idea that Roe v Wade was not the thing that made abortion legal, and you believe that overturning it would make all abortions "banned in the United States."

And then you post hype to get others to believe the same thing.

Civics is not your strength. Then again, we knew that, since you predicted Joe Biden as the next President of the United States!

[adora]

Revolution usually happens not directly for political reasons, but during economic downturn. When majority of the people don't have steady income, promising future or at least illusion of wealth and safety.
As the social gap widens and the president is taking more vacation than he should, it feels like pre-1789 all over again.
One of the smartest thing Clinton did was to encourage education during economic downturn. There were a lot more scholarship and loans available so people who were unemployed can go back to school. When the economy is good, they are ready to contribute.

[adora]

Revolution usually happens not directly for political reasons, but during economic downturn. When majority of the people don't have steady income, promising future or at least illusion of wealth and safety.
As the social gap widens and the president is taking more vacation than he should, it feels like pre-1789 all over again.
One of the smartest thing Clinton did was to encourage education during economic downturn. There were a lot more scholarship and loans available so people who were unemployed can go back to school. When the economy is good, they are ready to contribute.

[bcammack]

Stankleberry,

Don't flatter yourself.

[Stankleberry]

Haha, I guess the comment I left here was a little too true for you to post it up. Aww.

[BobUK]

Hi Eric

The name of the poster is UNDER the post. My post was the one above. I really like Scott's blog too.

[Dalebert]

You left out our $9 trillion debt and the decline in perceived value of our FIAT currency both locall and around the world. That will help with the economic collapse.

[Dotacus]

People with lots to lose will never take up arms against the government in enough masses to overthow it. This country is far too rich for that to happen. Would you risk your house, family, job, life by grabbing a gun, club or other weapon and and walk in front of a group of Glock and M1 carrying Secret Service dudes for those points you listed? Hardly likely. If you were literally starving with no home, job, and your kids died of startvation or lack of medical attention, then you might. Until the percentage of those people get high enough to make a difference, there may be a lot of complaining, but no revolution, and we're really far from that. I'm not talking poor like the american version, with Nike shoes sipping Starbucks and eating McDonalds. Even they have to much to lose. I'm talking people with nothing.

[dedhed52]

WOW! Talk about a doomsday scenario! I think everything you mention is ENTIRELY possible ... and FRIGHTENING! I don't believe Americans are sheep at all. We may have long fuses, but eventually things will become too much for even the most complacent to take and things will explode.

But if we're already fighting wars in Iraq, Iran and Afganistan, where would the soldiers come from to fight the insurrection here at home? They'll all be overseas! So the revolution COULD be successful and change would come, restoring the Constitution and sanity to American government. Happy ending!

[Dmitry Z]

Revolutionary conditions have been studied and theorized over back in early 20 century (read Lenin works for reference). Italian Antonio Gramsci, while jailed by fascists, further explained, in 1930-ies, how the ruling class will be preventing such conditions from organizing. Your scenario, while highly attractive and logical, will suffer a blow from the media, which will distort the entire picture, making it seem that the conservatives and warmongers are staging most of the protests. The media Matrix has you. Sorry.

[Paul C]

This is only tangentially related, but it may raise a smile, Scott. I have just been reading a history book called "The Steel Bonnets", which is about the debated border when England and Scotland were both seperate nations.
Short version: the King of Scotland thought the border should be as far south as posssible (ie, well inside modern England). Meanwhile, the Queen of England considered the border should be as far north as possible (ie, well inside modern Scotland).

While the two nations were fighting each other, the people who actually lived ON the Anglo-Scottish border took full advantage of nobody being there to enforce any law, and efectively pleased themselves. They became a feudin' fightin' set of hillbilly clans with no allegience to any king or queen, and lived a life of plunder, thieving, fighting, cattle-rustling, robbery, et c, with no greater law than the Family. Effectively, these were lying, bullying,thieving, cheating, thugs with no social graces.

On unity betweeen England and Scotland, the border was pacified (read: the clansmen were rounded up and deported en masse to Ireland and colonies in North America).

The starting point of the history I've just read is the inauguration of President Richard M. Nixon. ("The Steel Bonnets" was written in 1971, before watergate).

The author notes that Nixon, who is flanked by outgoing Prez Lyndon B. Johnson and "chaplain" the Rev. Billy Graham , is one of the Names of the old thieving, lying, bullying, fighting, Border clans. As is Johnson. As is Graham. Without irony - that would have come after Watergate - he notes that this is where the old Border clans ended up, in the highest positions of moral and legal responsibility in the USA. The old robber barons and their henchmen who gave the world concepts like "blackmail" and "protection money".... and these are descendents of convicts who (Australia not having been discovered) were transported in chains accross the Atlantic. America, we apologise.

[DanFM]

'2. The new President serves his term slowly taking away American's civil rights "to keep our children safe from terrorists."

That could easily be rewritten as

2. The new President serves his term slowly taking away American's civil rights "to keep our children safe from [their own bad decisions, poor self esteem, bruised knees, bad influences, "one sided education", evil video games, ironic comic strips, smoking indoors, drinking, eating trans fats, driving too fast, Carbon Dioxide and bad sunburn, and so on and so forth].

a much more insidious erosion or rights and one far less American than responses to terrorist threats.

[Lickspittle]

Bush's unpopularity is by design. An unpopular president is an unstable president and more valuble in the global game of economic and military brinksmanship.

The Madman Theory:

http://hnn.us/articles/10428.html

[Chrisgiraffe's spirit of Nostradamus]

I see the future and this is how the revolution occurs.

1. President Bush enacts so much Executive Priveledge that voters become cynical and thinks "'the government' will do what it wants so I don't need to participate."

2. Voter turnout moves people in and out of office who have no real power over corporations who slice up America, put those slices in Hedge funds and sell them at specultive rates.

3. The increasing cost of foriegn involvement (wars, aid) is held against the value of land. Foriegn investment is encouraged to offset increasing national debt. US land values become meaningless numbers, mortgage companies fall into bankruptcy. The debt of the mortgage companies and speculators is absovled through bankruptcy proceedings which are no longer called bankruptcy. Words like 'war' 'bankruptcy' and 'the truth' no longer have meaning. The English language degernates and some suggest supplanting it with the language of increasing minorities.

4. The dollar slides in relation to other currencies. Foriegn investment and foriegn corporate control increase.

5. Chinese immigration increases. The melting pot eventually has no real color.

6. A boy looses a finger to a black cat firecracker on the fourth of July. Most everything is illegal or restricted because every company is afraid of getting sued or having to settle frivolous law suits. The boy was able to procure the firecracker from a seller in rural Alabama where there never is and was any regard for government laws.

7. More money is printed than GDP increases. A typical new car is lighter, gets better gas mileage than ever, lasts only 5 years, is made from foriegn parts and costs $30,000. Luxury vehicles (SUV's, Caddilacs, BMW's) approach $100,000 base price. Everyone buys a new car every two years and is in an ongoing debt but have no alternative since suburban sprawl dictates they own cars or be forced out of the job market.

8. Everyone has a college degree of some sort but no ground breaking technology revises investment bubbles like the internet once did. Most people have Masters degrees, since Bachelor Degreess are so common. All McDonalds workers have Bachelors. The new capital bubbles (like the internet/computing industry at the turn of the millineum) all occur overseas and are heavily invested in by the same hedge funds who gambled away the real value of all land in America. Some people make wild sums of money but it's never redistributed in the US.

9. US incurs more foreign debt. Foriegn investment dries up.

10. The US declares it no longer has any foriegn debt (as Hitler did). US citizens become fanatically nationalistic.

11. The US recognizes the need and dependence on foriegn natural resources. It uses it's industrial complex to invade weaker nearby countries, beginning with Cuba and Mexico. It doesn't call the invasions 'invasions'. It calls them Monroe Doctrine territory protection acts.

12. The US invades all of Central America and induces the world into WWIII by invading Brazil.

13. China, Russia and Western Europe ally to defeat the US.

14. The US population is decimated to nearly a quarter of its current level.

15. After the US surrender, the Ching resolution grants the US the rights to trade internationally but does not allow the US to maintain a standing army. Chinese and European soldiers are stationed in bases throughout the US to oversee and maintain a non-nationalistic US.

16. The US goes green and finally begins to create a society like Germany, Post WWII.

After that, China goes through the same process.

[angela]

The most unlikely event in your list, by far, is that McBain would die, moreover of natural causes.

It is clear when one studies "The Simpsons" in careful detail that McBain is invincible, furthermore, any death would not be of natural causes.

[Stomper]

I am amused by all the posters expressing concern about "tax and spend" Democrats in office. Exactly how would that be different from the Republican congress under Republican presidents? Oh, yeah. The Republicans just spend without collecting the taxes to pay for it. Instead, they count on future income (i.e., from our children) to pay their debts. Yeah, that's much better than an administration that actually tries to balance the books. Right.

I guess I never did understand Reaganomics.

--Stomper

[joe]

I'm quite sure all of that will unfold in a similiar fashion... That's when old "Uncle Molasses" with his sticky red maple fingers preys upon our nation's most sacred winter wonderland. The Upper Penninsula of Michigan. I for one am not going to sit idly by as the brave men lacrosse-loving moose jockeys. That's right Canada! I'm sure you're reading this with your dozens and dozens of soldiers sharpening their hockey sticks waiting for the flannel balloon to go up. You bring it on!

[bcammack]

Ron wrote:
"Whoever wins the election, they pull all U.S. troops out of the Middle East. The terrorists immediately take over Iraq, and respond with several thousand suicide bombers across North America and Europe, many of them armed with those nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons that were conveniently never found."
**********************************************

You remind me of a drunk old twit that swore to me, "Mark my words! If Bill Clinton is elected to a second term, the missiles will fly the very next day!! None of our enemies have any respect for that man!"

Turn off Fox Noise for a while and get some real information.

[Noah Vaile]

Here's a more realistic scenario: The democrats sweep the '08 elections and take it as a mandate to raise taxes and spend on social welfare programs. The military has to throw bake sales and the the vast wealth of the nation is redistributed. The economy collapses from lack of investment. Unemployment rises along with taxes. Terrorists have a field day car and homocide bombing on the streets and in the malls of American cities and the government can't figure out why all this is happening. So they raise taxes some more. They don't have the fire- or man-power to bring order to the streets. Luckily the people do. The people discover they don't need a government that practices taxation without rationalization. The Second American Revolution ensues to re-establish the first.

[Christopher Welle]

I on the other hand am already researching moving and staying in Canada. In the hope that the eventual revolution and war against the USA won't effect Canada all that much.

[Eric]

Re Bob UK's comment of "Please stop being so so liberal. Stop with your political blogging and stick to cartoons..."

While I'm a conservative (albeit one who despises the autocratic and treasonous Bush regime) who finds Scott's politics relatively liberal, any reader who doesn't want to read what Scott writes, don't. This is my favorite blog, because, whether or not Scott's opinion reflects mine, it's almost always provocative and rarely the S.O.S.

[Bear]

I think that your scenario is headed in the right direction, but that it would take a step or two more to prompt a popular uprising. The country is too much under the influence of Orwellian reality for a revolt to occur much sooner.

I think the possiblity of a coup from the top, the oligarchy that runs our world de facto now, requires no steps at all and could, in fact, have already occured. Perhaps the theft of the 2000 election in Florida and the Supreme Court was the first overt shot, but since the public grumbled and accepted the results no second shot was fired. The 2004 election was stolen even more egregiously in Ohio and still no overt coup. Perhaps nothing overt will occur until the people are about to elect someone unacceptable to our masters (if that is possible). Then we may find that, because of a terroristic threat or event, it is impossible to hold elections at this time.......and this time goes on forever...I may be over the top but, consider, things are so bad that you dare not say that I'm plain old nuts!

[adam]

If a revolution does take place, I will be glad that I still have my assault rifles...Lord knows I'll need em.

[Jason Levine]

I think there's a more likely route to rebellion.

1. A presidential candidate wins the election by a landslide. The losing party complains about massive election fraud. Their complaints are written off as paranoid ramblings and aren't looked into.

2. The new President serves his term slowly taking away American's civil rights "to keep our children safe from terrorists." This is done in a very creeping fashion over 4 years and is, each time, in response to a "very real terrorist threat."

3. After 4 years, election day looms. The people are tired of all of the phantom terrorist threats and it's clear that the President will lose his re-election bid. As a sign of his loss of power, he's unsuccessful in passing legislation to stop a new "imminent" terrorist threat (which would also restrict Americans more).

4. A day or two before the election, a 9-11 level terrorist hit occurs using just the method that the President was seeking legislation to prevent. The President's response is swift and the men responsible are captured and/or killed. The attack is somehow connected with the election process.

5. Due to the attack and the possibility of terrorists tampering with elections, the President postpones all Federal elections and declares a state of National Emergency.

6. Various protesters take to the streets, only to be rounded up as terrorist sympathizers. Public support is with the President on this.

7. People eventually realize that the President has no intention of allowing elections to be held. Congress tells the President to hold elections. He "coincidentally" reveals (McCarthy-style) new intelligence that states that some members of Congress are actually working for Al Qaeda. Those members are arrested and the President dissolves Congress.

Now for the interesting part of the revolution: It wouldn't come just from the people, but from a fractured army. The President has a core group of loyal army units doing his bidding, but the army at large has been getting more and more uneasy with the changes to America. Dissolving Congress is the last straw and the army turns on the President. There is a "US Army" vs "President's Army" clash and the US Army wins. The President is arrested, tried for treason, and sordid details about his rise to power start coming to light.

Now the question that arises is how would we recover. It's nice to think that a new President would be elected who would put America back together again, but let's be realistic. Americans are easily distracted and government hates giving up power. The politicians would likely repeal many of the President's latest and most severe restrictions, but would hold on to some of the "milder" ones.

There would be a psychological "price of gas" effect. Americans would see some civil liberties return and would celebrate it. However, few would really realize that they are still overall behind on civil liberties. And fewer would do anything about it. (Just like people would celebrate $2.50 a gallon gas as cheap after it hit $3+ a gallon, not remembering that it was over $1 less not that long ago.)

So in the end, politicians would wield more power, and Americans would have less freedom, but general balance would be restored.

[jackjumper]

Hey Jonathan -

I'm not listening to Rosie (blech!), I'm listening to Republicans. That's why I'm scared.

[Jon]

WTF ???

Did somebody hijack Scott's password and post in his place?

[Jim]

I've little idea about partisan American politics but I do know economics and I'll tell you one thing. Big change is coming to the USA.

The world-wide appetite to buy US treasury bonds has been sated. The amount of US debt taken on by the world means you have mortgaged the next generation to pay the coupons and you'll have to consume an ever increasing amount of imports and send even more dollars overseas to stay afloat. When the world economy falters, and I believe a world recession is coming, the Federal Bank will either go bankrupt trying to service its loans or default and devalue the dollar, destroying the incomes, pensions and assets of millions of Americans. In either case, coupled with unpopular military deployments abroad, growing nationwide social inequality and a vast ethnically different population held together mostly by loose nationalistic concepts and I feel that the conditions for political change will be perfect. The question is what system will replace the mildly dysfunctional industrial-military federated pseudo-democracy you have become in the past 60 years?

It is my earnest hope that you, the American people, embrace the challenges ahead in a peaceful, proactive way. The longer you delay, the less likely a strong democratic America will emerge and the world needs a strong democratic America. But I doubt it. I feel that the country will eventually break-up along historical, economic and ethic boundaries. Pity.

[Mike from Parma]

re: 'Colin Colwell' post
"If we see martial law and a clampdown on the US population by the US military, [...] Some (read that as minority) of troops will do what they are told, no matter what that is, but the majority will refuse to engage against fellow American citizens."

I pray to FSM that that is so, but I'm rather sure whomever is in charge will be smarter than that, and peg any 'protesters' as some sort of "rogue element", 'terrist'/'dissident', what have you, thereby separating the protestors from their humane status. (at least thats how the military has always worked with its 'enemies')

[D]

Sounds like part of the intro in the old movie Red Dawn.

On a slightly related subject, what do you think of this idea to "improve" electronic voting:

Two contracts get awarded to independently audited companies.

First device accepts the electronic votes. First device records and reports on the voting results and then produces a hard receipt formatted to the specifications of the second machine. Receipt is formatted in a way that it is clear to the voter what vote it contains.

Voter manually inspects the receipt and inserts it into machine 2. Machine 2 tabulates results either real time or in a batch based on the physical records. All receipts go into locked storage.

System 1 and System 2 results are independently calculated and validated against each other by polling location. By my assessment this provides all necessary checks and balances as well as immediate voting results that could be verified down to polling location. The voter gets to see that his receipt accurately reflected his intentions so there would also be confidence in the system as long as system 1 and system 2 were run by different competing companies.

[JustAthought]

One of the first things a dictator or totalitarian government does when it comes to power is take away the ability of the population to overthrow it. They then create police forces to make sure the population stays under control and jail people for just speaking condescending viewpoints. (or maybe, like in China, roll a tank over them)

In American, Liberals and Democrats want more gun control laws and believe the 2nd amendment does not guarantee the rights of private citizens to keep and bare arms. They make it harder and harder for honest citizens to acquire firearms, but don’t enforce the existing laws against the felons and criminals who have illegal firearms and use them in criminal acts.

Anyone see how ironic this is?

And you worry about a Republicans being in power!!!

[Colin Colwell]

Many of you pointing to the Conservative leaning of the military only have that partially correct. We're traditionalists, not necessarily Conservatives. The oath of service is to the Constitution and to obey lawful orders, it is not to one party over another. Just because, in this scenario, a "conservative" shreds what's left of the Constitution and institutes martial law, doesn't mean the military will follow. Actually the opposite should happen. By definition of our oath, such actions would make the government the "domestic enemy" since, as I said, the oath is to the Constitution and if the Constitution is no longer in effect, it's our duty to reinstate it.

If we see martial law and a clampdown on the US population by the US military, I think you'll see the most likely rebellion coming from the military itself to set things in DC back to Constitutionally mandated levels. Some (read that as minority) of troops will do what they are told, no matter what that is, but the majority will refuse to engage against fellow American citizens.

[BobUK]

Pierre, your argument, whilst undoubtedly accurate, can be reduced to just three words: bread and circuses.

Nothing is new in the world of politics.

Also, everyone stop bitching about Scott's spelling - the web is meant to be chatty and informal. Ask yourself how accurate your own typing is going to be when you are dashing off a blog entry when you should be working.

[amazed]

Scott, just because the Supreme Court has swung toward a conserative slant, you hint that the countery needs a revolution?

I don't rememeber conservatives calling for a overthrow of the goverment and removal of cival liberties when the liberals controlled the court.

Please stop being so so liberal. Stop with your political blogging and stick to cartoons, where you rock as a writer.

[TallDave]

"7. An opening on the Supreme Court allows the new president to push a conservative into the slot. This moves the court completely to the right. All abortions are banned in the United States."

Also, this is impossible. The right-wing position is not that the federal government should ban abortions, it's that the government should not stop state legislatures from banning abortions.

9. Strained by the war in Iraq, and now Iran, and potentially Syria, the American economy crumbles.

We could afford all three and a couple more. Military spending as a percentage of GDP today is far below what it was in Vietnam or Korea, let alone WW II.

[Stealth]

Wow, I find it quite intereasting that Scott's numbers are not only worng, but missing some things.

July 15th Associated Press-Ipsos poll
Presedient Bush approval rating - 33%, unchanged.
Congressional Approval rating - 24%, down 11 points since may.

Guess we know what side of the isle Scott is from.

[TallDave]

First off, there's no institution strong enough in this country to carry out a coup except the military. The career military is very conservative, very patriotic, and very loyal to their oath to the Constitution. Secondly, leftists or populists are far more likely act against the Constitution and require a coup to set things right.

FDR interned 100,000 Asian-Americans, jailed war protestors, threatened the free press, violated precedent in order to serve for life, and tried to pack the SCOTUS by making new rules for them. He was the closest thing to a Constitution-shredding dictator we've ever had. If we had another FDR, it's just barely possible the military might step in and demand new elections.

[BobUK]

Pierre, your argument, whilst undoubtedly accurate, can be reduced to just three words: bread and circuses.

Nothing is new in the world of politics.

Also, everyone stop bitching about Scott's spelling - the web is meant to be chatty and informal. Ask yourself how accurate your own typing is going to be when you are dashing off a blog entry when you should be working.

[Ron]

Here's an easier one:

Whoever wins the election, they pull all U.S. troops out of the Middle East. The terrorists immediately take over Iraq, and respond with several thousand suicide bombers across North America and Europe, many of them armed with those nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons that were conveniently never found.

Everyone in the United States immediately concludes that the U.S. government is A.) utterly incompetent, B.) working with the terrorists, or C.) both. The economy collapses because it was not built to survive being blown up. The army and police go AWOL to go home and try to protect their families, since it's pretty obvious the government is not going to be any help. One day, every shotgun shell and can of food in the country is either purchased or stolen, and the next day nobody goes to work because they are hiding in the basement. They try to declare martial law, but the army already quit and went home, along with the police, fire department, and everybody else.

And that only requires a chain of two events (pullout from Iraq, terrorists respond in force) that both seem pretty likely.

[jerry w.]

The funniest stuff ever!

I love all the yahoos coming out of the woodwork and warning us of the "Liberal Media". What a great disconnect this is from the reality that almost all the media is in the hands (or pockets) of a few corporations that are so far from liberal that laughing is the only response.

And of the unlikely most likely to happen? Look at the huge number (even more than the number of morons correcting you on spelling) that say McCain could not get elected.

2nd would be the ones worried about Hillary trashing the constitution. What have Bush et al left (no pun intended) to trash?

We're in such deep shit now, even "W's" rectal probe can't raise much of a laugh.

http://boskolives.wordpress.com/

[Jabba]

Well, keeping an open mind, I can get through almost all of it. But the final line wouldn't seem likely in this scenario. One of those rules that seems unbreakable is "War is good for the economy."

OK, I'm only 33 and wouldn't know what the economic climate was like back during the Vietnam War, but I'm pretty sure that the economy couldn't be *that* bad.

So that's the part I think wouldn't stand up. However, the first eight alone would be enough for a possible revolution. But it wouldn't be a traditional coup. The military generally leans to the right, and even more so in this situation, because it makes them more important than they already are (heck, our front line boys might even make a decent pay check for a change). So we the people wouldn't get much help there, unless of course the generals know that the President likes big red buttons. Only then would they be forced to do something.

The revolution would therefore require the actions of Congress. With 99% of the population backing them, they can impeach the President on any grounds they chose. I don't think the military would stand in the way, no matter how much they like the President. Congress, afterall, can cut their paychecks.

[David Huntley]

And which part of this scenario couldn’t happen?

Answer: McCain/? winning against a Hillary/Obama ticket. Completly impossible, so if that does happen expect a revolution.

[Holt]

hahahahaha the post by Tom on July 31, 2007 at 02:10 PM gave me a good laugh.
He must be joking. I can't believe anyone could really believe that! You should be a comedian tom!

[Ibid]

I think step four is where it all falls apart. The protesters taking to the streets. It might happen if the cable goes out, but as long as we have cable and air conditioning people are content to watch the world fall apart on CNN.
No, I think if there's a revolution it'll start wit the military saying "but we don't WANT to be war criminals."

[Maggie]

Tow words: peak. oil.

Most likely cause of the next big economy crash. You can handle more war, you big wussy capitalists, but oil is behind EVERYTHING.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

[Tom Gao]

How 'bout starting a revolution to have...(deep breath)...G.W Bush relected for another 2 terms? This is not that unthinkable. America is stuffed anyhow. Might as well have a funny accidental president delivering the State of Union address in undergarments with beer and pretzel stains. God bless.

[Tim]

How about this scenario:

A corrupt right wing businessman from Texas siezes control of the country dispite not having won an election.

He proves to be utterly inept and hardly able to string a meaningfull sentance together.

Terrorists from Afgahnistan atack New York and Washington, the president uses this as an excuse to invade Iraq.

The war in Iraq causes huge instability and is ghenerally accepted to have been a bad move.

If the US hasn't had a revolt yet, what the hell are you waiting for?

[Leonel]

Scott, I was going to say "Most Americans can't be bothered to vote let alone take up arms" (the first thing that popped into my mind when I read your post) but someone said it first. Even considering the amount of personal fire power common folk are allowed to have, I guess it would only be used in an unorganized fashion, to loot and rack havoc. And that is not a revolution.

(Here in Portugal we had a revolution back in '74, but it was carried out by the Military themselves, mainly because they were sick and tired of the wars in Africa with former colonies for more than a decade. There's also a rumour that personal economic interests of high ranks in the Military were at stake, but nothing as been proved so far. I wish Oliver Stone was Portuguese...)

[Chaps]

I think you Seppoes are Revolting enough !!

[Detlef]

Events skip #1..#8 and fast forward to #9

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=email_en&refer=home&sid=aKsqEJVi3TZc

while people argue how to spell "coup d'état".

[pierre]

I agree with your view that history is made of events that looked unlikely before they actually happened. Totally true.

I don't see a revolution or a coup happening in the US because its people are "soft". Why go and join a revolution when you could munch doritos on your couch, watching Fox News and chill ?

Revolutions are done by people with nothing to lose. Americans have too much to lose from a revolution, so that ain't happening.

Another catastrophe scenario is the US abruptly turning into a fascist country. Someone attempted to characterize a facist state, in 14 points, see how the US fits this : http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm

[JamesC]

1. We send 500,000 easily influenced people oversees to be trained how to overthrow a government.

2. Have the US government become so corrupt that people don't see any reason to have it anymore.

3. Have a leader who does not believe his power is limited by the constitution.

[Ally]

"The part about someone making Cheney look like Bambii. The dark lord has no equal or superior...."

bollox. two words.

Chuck Norris is superior to all.

[wernman]

#1 couldn't happen. The repubs will never elect a liberal democrat no matter how long he's worn a sign reading "conservative". Though corrupt enough, McCain isn't smart enough to mount the required national conspiracy it would take to rig all the voting machines.

[Christophe Thill]

You forgot the fall of a meteorite on the White House.

Hey, can you prove it can't happen ?

[Nacho]

Amazing. I didn't understand how this worked and now I do. Just Human knows it. But still, he does it. He knows he's going to lose the argument.
Automatically Jason Allen forgets about the first part of the argument (which was good) destroys the Nazi part of Just Human's argument and that's it, he wins the argument.

Go Revolution!!! You guys need to wake up, I'm not from the US, I don't live in the US and I can tell you that the way we (or at least I) see you from outside is as a bunch of sheep being fooled by their state of comfort created by the government (not only the present one, it started a long time ago) to pass on their own agenda of (world) domination.

Anyone read Orwell's 1984? Minitrue and Minipax are working excellently in the US, now they've started implementing Miniluv and in no time you will see Miniplenty taking over supply...

Go Revolution!!!

[SJ]

Is it just me but do all "rightwingers" sound angry? Seem to have missed the point of the post...

#9 is the only thing that needs how it happens is need not be thru the route you mention.

[beber]

Not being American, I would say that the unlikely point is the 10th about having a revolution.
From my point of view this kind of problems already occured, and if history repeats itself, people will have forgotten about the 8 first points when the 9th occurs, they will consider withdrawn allies as traitors and hate them, blame economical problems on evil countries and elect the Vice President as President at the next election.

[Marxist]

US is next to impossible to "rub out".

[mnuez]

In my opinion the violence done to the psyche of over a hundred million Americans by the growing social-economic-political gap in this country more than justifies a revolution by any moral standard held by revolutionaried throughout the ages.

[I could get into this in far greater detail but it would hardly appear worthwhile at this moment owing to the small numbers of people I can expect to read this. See my blog www.mnuez.blogspot.com for some scattered details on the subject (and others)]

It further appears to me that the main reason why such a revolution has not occured, and appears unlikely to occur in the immediate future, is owing to "opiats of the masses".

Religion may be one such opiate but in our days we've got far greater opiates than any Karl Marx could have dreamed of. Some are literal opiates such as all of the antidepressants and coma-inducing "medications" that keep people feeling good despite their being wage-slaves, but the better ones are the simple luxuries of television, air conditioning and internet porn. And I joke not.

Lacking these various distractments a good many Americans would have risen up in revolt by now over the discrepancy between their turgid lives and Paris Hilton and company's glamorous/reckless ones.

Life truly is shit for over a hundred million Americans and the political and "justice" systems perpetuate that shittiness by placing the lion's share of the power into the hands of the economically well-to-do in such a way that their own interests are always served and the interests of the less well-to-do are rarely served.

To be clear - I think that a revolution by any means other than the ballot box would be tragic. I do not believe that it would be immoral - only tragic and with precious little of any good to show for it. I therefore support no such revolution. But the fact that the masses of Americans don't even seem inclined toward revolution makes me wonder whether they may indeed be so inferior in capabilities that they deserve all of the shitting on that they're currently receiving.

To reiterate, the situation at the current is tragic.

mnuez
www.mnuez.blogspot.com

[Alex]

I am English not American, but I have been thinking about this possibility on and off for a couple of months now. Here is my latest scenario:

1. Bush wins election again under further "dodgy" circumstances.

2. Moves are now made to impeach Bush.

3. Bush has potential impeachers arrested and imprisoned without trial as enemies of the state.

4. Protesters march against the arrests.

5. Protesters are arrested.

6. Bush declares Martial Law.

7. Army splits into pro and anti Bush factions.

Does anyone think this is possible? Would this lead to civil war / revolution?

Alex

[stuart - velkairiwyth]

Somebody has been watching V for Vendetta or Equilibrium.

(If you haven't - I thoroughly recommend them if you like a cyberpunky atmosphere (like bladerunner) and storys about over zealous governments and their grip on the country they should be working FOR.

But yeah - it would probably do the country good to kick some ass at the top!

[Jeff]

I wouldn't rule any one of those steps out. I'd just say that each and every step except for #2 is highly unlikely. 1/100 chance of #1 * 1/100 chance of #3 * ...
The odds become vanishingly small very quickly.

@Lawless one - its true that private companies are still free to research stem cells if they wish to.

But there's well over $5 billion in government funding going to the NSF, not even counting the stunningly large "defense" research budget and the various other ways in which the federal government funnels money into projects. So tell me - if you're looking to start up a private company working in medical research, do you start it up in the area where you know you can get half your costs covered by government-funded research, or in the area where you have to foot the whole bill yourself?

When the government funds so many areas of research and arbitrarily refuses to fund one venue it essentially does kill off that venue.

[Ian]

That's a lot of posts.

What about the revolution created when the voting machines declare a 62% vote for Bush, and the republican-stacked Federal Courts find them innocent of electoral fraud?

I think that would be the opportunity for Canada to invade again, and burn down the capital for the third time. (Speaking as an Australian.)

[Kevin Kunreuther]

Since we're playing fantasy future:
Not that I'm voting in this presidential election or supporting any one candidate, BUT, Hilary is too polarizing a candidate for everyone to get behind. If the Clinton machine cinches the nomination, even if Obama accepts the veep slot, the Republicans will have a clean shot at stealing the Presidency once again. The probable top choice will either be Guiliani or Romney at the top of the ticket, but the ultra-conservative veep is going to be Senator Brownback from Kansas. He is the scary Republican veep candidate to watch. Then your scenario would take place, Giuliani would probably cancer up and die in office, Romney would be shot by some fanatic for not being conservative enough.
OTOH...
If Obama does manage to get the Dem nomination, best to get Clinton's support but get a mild veep candidate who can make gaffes amusing enough for press but not distract from campaign too much, i.e. Sen Joe Biden. Clinton can be promised a seat on Supreme Court, perhaps Chief Justice spot if Roberts spazzes out again (if he won't step down, Congress can remove him from office). An Obama/Biden ticket would be enough to unite the country again.
Now here is your disaster scenario. In lame duck period after the election, some unforeseen disaster strikes followed by serious economic downturn. The administration declares something close to martial law and refuses to give up reins on Jan. 20th. Congress attempts to remove President and Vice President; immediately almost all Congressional members are arrested or detained. A coup from within army overthrows administration and attempts to forcibly install Obama as President (sworn to uphold the Constitution is usual reason stated in this case). Bush, Biden and Obama are killed in melee. Pelosi attempts to assume office but is usurped by Cheney and minions. The U.N., Canada, Mexico and NATO intervene. Foreign troop presence in Washington D.C., New York City, South Texas, Southern New Mexico and Southern Arizona, Kentucky, Ohio, Western Pennsylvania and upstate New York. Chaos and unrest in occupied areas. Texas and California recall National Guard units overseas and declare marshall law and order foreign troops (Mexico and U.N.) to immdeiately withdraw. Michiagan, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota recall Congressional and Senatorial representatives and take steps to withdraw from United States and be admitted to Canada as provinces. The Pacific Northwest states, Idaho, Montana, and the Dakotas apply for entrance as Canadian provinces the following year. Mexico attempts to re-annex occupied territories by organizing it as one border state. Texas, New Mexico and Arizona form a military and economic alliance against Mexico, and fight a bloody war. Many conscripts on both sides are Hispanic. Ethnic and religous violence escalates in Southwest.
U.S. Constitution is re-adopted by remaining states. Hilary Clinton finally elected as U S President. New 36 star flag adopted. Foreign, UN and NATO troops withdraw from U.S. Midwest, NYC and Washington, D.C. Puerto Rico reluctantly becomes independent, civil war ensues between factions wanting to be admitted as U.S. state and nationals. Panama surprisingly petitions Congress for admittance as state but is initially rebuffed by Congress due to anti-Latino feeling, eventually Panama admitted first as territorial commonwealth status, after one more plebiscite and fighting in Congress, becomes 51rst or 37th state, depending how you look at it. Clinton attempts to buy or lease San Francisco and surrounding counties from Dominion of California, President Schwartzenegger holds a surprise plebiscite allowing Californians to decide to be readmitted to United States. Prime Minister Scott Adams objects, cites he'd rather be Canadian. He gets wish and is deported to Province of Oregon on a wooden rail. Following California's readmittance, Schwartzenegger becomes next U.S. President.
PHEW!

[Buff The Biffmeister]

Well, your order is all screwed up, but all are plausible.

The whole current middle east thing is pretty to explain and predict right now. We went into Iraq for one reason, to stop the middle east from switching to Euros as their oil currency. We will leave when we have a government in place, democratic or not, that will do what we tell them. We don't care who they sell their oil to, as long as it is in dollars.

Why is this important? If OPEC switches to Euros, it would spell the end of the dollar as the worlds reserve currency (already happening). This would cause the dollar to collapse, massive inflation (or stagflation if you like) and the rapid collapse of our economy.

How about Iran? If they switch, or threaten to switch to Euros, then we invade. If not, then we wave our big stick around and do nothing. Same goes for any other oil producing nation.

Of course, we're screwed anyway. The boomer bust is gonna be real bad. Take a look at the population pyramids at census.gov for some sobering projections. Here's a hint. Pyramids work, columns or inverted pyramids don't.

Or, how about the trade deficit? The decimation of our manufacturing base? Our sub par school system turning out way too many consumer whores and not enough engineers? Crippling health care costs? The real estate bubble? Top soil rates reduced to dangerously low levels? Peak oil?

Or how about this. As a country we have either spent all our f**king money on worthless depreciating crap or given it to a few ultra rich who can easily move it outside of our borders. That and all the corporations have turned into transnationals who can, and are legally obligated to, move wherever the most money is. Very soon, that will not be the US.

We are, quite simply, f**cked.

[mo]

Once again Americans are blind to the real problem.
It's the money stupid.Or more bluntly..the deficit.

War costs money.
Now back in the day a good war could create good jobs and bring cash rolling in.
But now? Most of these jobs are already filled by automation and experienced employees. There is no new employment being created. The business still makes money through corruption and overspending..always going over budget is not an accident, it's a way of life for the big war contractors.
Here is the real problem. The government has farmed out war to private companies that have no loyalty except to the shareholder and even that is pretty iffy. The government HAS to pay if it wants all the shiny bullets.

The US government doesn't have any money. That is why you have a deficit. This means you spent all the money already but are too stupid to stop buying stuff.Seems like a theme in America.
The US has to borrow the money to pay for the war.
The US does this by offering itself up to the highest bidder.
What the American public has yet to understand is that buyer can call in the loan at any time. You don't get great loan terms when you are fiscally irresponsible.
Who owns most of the US debt?
They could wake up tomorrow feeling a little grumpy and in need of a little cash to buy some more oil. They then tell the US to pay up, they are calling back the loans.
The US can do two things, pay the money back and bankrupt the country or they can tell the loan holders to pee up a rope.
America will of course choose option two.
Refusing to repay means no other country in the world will lend the US another dime.
It's easy to be a superpower spending other peoples money.
So now the government can't pay the contractors, no new shiny toys . There is no money to pay anyone, no Medicare/Medicaid, no Social Security. No government workers at all. Politicians and Presidents may believe they run the government but the truth is government workers keep the government running. Without them it all disappears.Will martial law be enforced and all these people forced to go to work for no pay? Do you start shooting them if they don't do it? Would it be considered treason to refuse to starve? Of course it would, it's America.

Remember when Germany's currency was so devalued it took a wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of bread?
Take a closer look at how devalued US currency is right now. Not very comforting is it?

America will slip into chaos when the MONEY runs out.
It's always about the cash.

[mr_poopyhead]

hey mr. adams,

i think you'd enjoy this article:
http://www.thestar.com/article/241516

it agrees with everything you write, hence you are programmed to enjoy it thoroughly. thank me once you're done creaming yourself...

[Tizzle]

Regardless of the possibilities, do you have to scare us like that? Intellectual stimulation is one thing, but the thought of this one makes me need a drink.

Please be funny tomorrow. Pretty please with sugar on top.

[ralf]

well I would be interested what would happen if

1) President Bush gets the power to suspend senate and congress and rule with unlimited powers due to a crisis

2) he executes it and there are no elections next year

btw, 1) already has happened...

[Yo]

Well I dont like the economy crumbling point, because war tends to reinforce economies, at least as how i see them, i may very well be wrong. But its unlikely that Mcain would win with faulty voting machines, because the hackers who would choose the election for the rest of the US would probally not choose someone with a really right wing Vice President. Least I'm hoping those hackers are smart enough...

[Alex]

Im tempted to say that the immigration debate in addition to a Democratic Congress and white house would be the factors to a revolution.
Look at it

Currently; we have citizen groups patrolling the boarder because the Feds wont do it. Something tells me that if the government gets more lax on the border issue, something that i can see from a Democrat Congress, the groups will intensify.

During the Clinton years, militia activities were at an unusual high. You can bet that if Hillary gets elected, the militias will pick up where they left off; and if she goes through with strong-left policies, they will strenghthen their support.

With these two forces in play, im sure that Hillary would face some form of right-wing domestic unrest.

[KD]

Scott taking for granted your series of events happens, if the economy crumbles so badly that people are starving in the streets, there is a possibility of a revolution depending on the circumstances. If it happened, it would also be a little ironic because it would be the side with all the anti-war people (war hawk-hawks?) starting it.

I think #7 as the least likely to happen. Right now the court is pretty well split so you wouldn't have an assured chance that a liberal would be the one to kick the bucket first.

As an aside, I do see as the abortion issue as something that could cause a revolution, but not for at least another generation or three. A supreme court overturning Roe v Wade could further that like when the republicans got Lincoln into office and the democratic south paniced and any major economy crash like the one in point #9 could stress the issue, however I don't see the level of hatred and population divide needed to start a civil war quite yet.

With that said I hope no one from congress wins in '08 because they are ranked even lower than Bush in approval ratings. That says a lot. Go dark horse canidates in both parties!

[Drone74B]

People seem to have such a problem with governments "taking away rights". Problem is, when have people shown that they can make use of their freedoms without completely self-destructing? I don't like being controlled either, but I can't say I blame the government half the time. Maybe if people could live together without hating everything and everyone under the sun, governments wouldn't have to restrict so much.

[Ernie Oporto]

You left out "what happens if peanut butter and jelly sandwiches gain consciousness and demand voting rights", and "what happens if Maddona gets pissed off and declares herself Empress of Detroit, sparking massive diarrhea."

Veeery contrived.

[swio]

The scenario that could lead to a coup is very simple and requires no revolution.

The next president is McCain or another RWDB. Lets call him "POTUS Crazy". As first order of business POTUS Crazy keeps the troops in Iraq and then orders a nuclear attack on Iran.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff, abhorring the idea of first use of nuclear weapons and knowing how vulnerable their troops in Iraq are outright refuses.

Nobody finds out.

The Whitehouse does not want anyone to know its lost the control of the military and the Joint Chiefs don't want the public to know its beyond civilian control. Its only 2009. POTUS Crazy will be in power for at least 4 more years. Congress can't impeach the president for giving an order and nobody knows about it anyway.

What happens then? A power struggle between the military and the President. POTUS Crazy tries to replace the military senior leadership with officers loyal to his cause and the military leaders start playing politics, lining up their supporters in Congress. What's to stop POTUS Crazy using the new terror laws and Department of Justice to send military commanders to jail? How far will the military leaders go watching some of their own being thrown in jail? What happens when the Whitehouse finds units with lower level commanders willing to take orders from POTUS Crazy and ignore the Joint Chiefs?

What happens when thousands of highly trained soldiers have to decide they are loyal to the President, and thousands of other highly trained soldiers decide they're loyal to the Joint Chiefs?

Final question: if this was happening right now, how would you know?

[Tyler]

If there's a revolution, I definitely want to get in on some good riots. I'm even Republican, and I would definitely join in if I could blow up some random cars and get away with it.

[Marcus]

just me and my coupe de'ville...
42

[rd]

i am impressed by polyglots commenting here
someone knows dalandzadgad, wow
btw it means 70 trees
if he happens to me my compatriot me marries him immediately
coz your readers are many splendid things according to you
but most likely s/he is one of those backpacking imperialist dudes wandering
whoever you are this is for you and hope it won't cause revolutions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRo4orZs-Kw

yesterday i left a beautifully unified theory of Dilbert-unicorn-god existence in support of the wager
though of course expressed in colourful orthographical style and you did not approve it :(
me hurt

[Rick]

heh... even if this all did happen... I'll be in India for the next two years anywho...

[TasTigger]

I think that's a clever observation that nothing seems likely until after it happens. That's why I think that your scenario won't happen, precisely because there is nothing there that couldn't happen. Revolution is much more likely to start with something completely unexpected and unrelated, such as the Rodney King riots some years back. Incidents such as this provide a spark with the potential to ignite any nearby barrels of dynamite.

[Catbert]

You assume that the revolution would come from left thinking people. Never happen. People die in revolutions and the only die the left knows is tie-dye.

It would also take lots of effort, not just sitting around talking about effort or forming the Committee on Effort Research Group to determine what needs to be done.

Just think of Wally trying to revolt.

[Adam]

For all of you saying McCain can't win, that's why #2 happens. Duh.

[Robby]

In the circumstances you describe, most of the president's detractors will be claiming that he is perverting the basic principles of democracy. This means that if they advocate revolution, they will be called hypocrites and disregarded by all but a few. Those who are heeded will be the ones who are calling for rational people to retake the country, possibly through an impeachment of the president.

(I realize that there is a "movement" underway to impeach the current president, but it is spurious at best and its supporters are a bunch of idiots if they think they will accomplish anything more useful than a lot of yelling.)

[Billy B]

Whatever, it's just history repeating itself because you monkeys are still so stupid that you can't see what is happening and can't turn things around.
Billy B

[Phil Taint]

None of it could happen - unless the economy goes in the tank. It's not close to being in the tank - yet. The great depression is as close as we came to a revolution in this country.

My theory, backed up by a cursory (at best) knowledge of history, is that all wars are caused by an excess of unmarried, unemployed men living in sexually repressive societies.

The reason for the apathy of the majority is that things are relatively good right now. Full employment, relative sexual freedom (ok, not as good as most of europe - but still...), and the puritan work ethic that is being augmented by recent Asian and Mexican immigrants. We have a lot of fat poor people, and only severely mentally ill people starve to death. Most Americans are perched pretty high up in Mazlow's hierarchy of needs.

Not exactly a recipe for revolution.

The Middle East is filled with an excess of blue-balled, unemployed men. Add crushing dictatorship and a culture of hot-headed rage and vengeance and you get guys willing to blow themselves up for no good reason.

[Mason]

hehe...

It reminds me of a political cartoon where Bush is sitting down at a table across from a figure labeled "We the people". Behind him is a graph of his approval ratings and he says "I know you're unhappy, but we're not talking revolution or anything, right?" The figure on the other side of the table shrugs and says "All options are on the table."

Realistically though, there will be no revolution unless things get much worse. Your scenario is absurd, but even if it happened, there'd be no reason to think that taking up arms would make it better - so no one would. So long as the fighting and dying is far away, and so long as people can still buy gas for their cars and food for their children, no amount of dissatisfaction with the government will cause people to risk their lives to overthrow it.

[Cold Fusion]

Add -
1.) Consecutive term limits are abolished.
2.) The current "internet" fractures into multiple B2B and private nets.
3.) HIV/HPV or some new STD attains an airborne vector.
4.) China calls in all debt. Wal-Mart goes tits-up.
5.) Vermont, then Oregon and California secede from the Union.
6.) Seven years after honeybees go extinct the world's food supply drops to 20%.
7.) The police actions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran and Syria extend to Pakistan, Korea and ? - even with the draft the troops are spread thin.
8.) As the judicial backlog nears 10 years for simple cases, FEMA starts to house 40% of United States citizens.
9.) Property taxes quadruple.
10.) It is revealed that cell fones cause a new type of mental illness (before their batteries ignite).
11.) A major fast-food outfit is revealed to be 20 years into a 40-year time bomb with a new type of Alzheimers.
12.) 7% of cubicle workers worldwide are diagnosed with the new, toner-induced "black lung."
13.) Most United States government positions get outsourced.
Revolution? How about "civil dysfunction?"

[steve macdonald]

The unlikely part, sorry to say Scott, is that YOU'VE studied any history. Here, try this scenario:

1. Go back to college.

2. Major in History.

3. Get a degree in the subject.

4. Revise this post.

Meantime, leave History to those who've actually learned something about it.

[XX EE]

America's corporate-owned, fascist media would *never* make populist protests the story of the day.

[D. Mented]

Which is the part that can't happen?
The part where people actually protest.
Nobody's happy with the way things are going, but nobody's doing anything about it and nobody's going to.
Our culture is not what it used to be; there are individuals who speak their minds, but to retain this much backbone, they have to be so contrary that they can't work with anyone else.
If religious leaders told their flocks that they had to protest something in government (such as those pesky "checks and balances" that keep the president from doing what's right) they would do so, but there's no grass-roots movement except to the bloglines to whine.
Nobody's going to do anything, so there will be no revolution or coup - unless somebody in the military feels he has a good shot at dictatorship...and would rather have that than lots of fat bribes from whoever's in power.
I'm just glad I don't have kids, because I don't know what I would tell them if they asked how things got this way...I did my share of protesting in the 60's and 70's, even a little in the 80's, but if the next generation can't stand up real soon (and I don't think it's going to happen) America will lose the constitution and the bill of rights forever.
Everybody's waiting for the next election, but there's still nobody worth voting for that has a snowball's chance in Phoenix,AZ.
D. Mented

[Andrew]

Your scenario of causes leading up to a revolution is complete garbage. We all know that if a revolution is going to occur that it will have to involve Paris Hilton in some sordid way. Preferably with a grainy video that we can all watch on BeastTube. This will no doubt result in the world's supply of hand lotion being all used up overnight, resulting is a massive crash in the stock market as the lubricant industries fail under the excessive demand. This would be a disaster greater than the Great Depression that people suffer on Monday when they start the working week.

[Dee]

I don't think we the people got it in us any more for a revolution. If we did, I think we would have stormed the
Bastille by now.

But, dang, if we had a revolution, we'd have to get our fat asses off the couch, go outside in the heat and miss American Idol, Dancing With The Stars, wrestling and NASCAR.

Maybe in the winter when it's not so hot. But what with summer re-runs and all maybe summer would be the best time for a revolution so we don't have to make the sacrifices listed in the above paragraph. Also, winter has the added sacrifice of having to give up watching football. What to do, what to do....

Man! The sacrifices to have a revolution would just be too much, ya know? :(

[Andy]

#4 isn't happening. The American people aren't taking to the streets unless there is an enormous economic collapse.

And even then, I'm not sure the mood would swing leftwards. I can easily imagine mobs taking out their frustration on immigrants or other easily-identified scapegoats.

[nseagal]

being not too familiar with american politics (or politics for that matter), i'm scared now!

[Tutu]

It could all happen except for the part where Bambi starts spelling it's name with two 'i's... the little deer is just not that pretentious...

[jake]

I had nearly trained myself NEVER to read the posts to anything you write, because I know that I will have an eye-rolling seizure after reading just a few of the opinionated baboons who post to most blithering nonsense every to contaminate the infosphere.

My training is now complete. The people who write replies to your posts are some of the dumbest damn SOBs every to draw breath. I can't read them anymore.

I know the loony idiocy that results from your every post must amuse the hell out of you, but I wish you'd make the posts private for your own viewing.

You have single-handedly made me lose even the tiniest shred of hope I ever held out for humanity, just because of the inexpressibly daffy and moronic comments to your posts.
I really had no idea that so many people who are so stupid thought they were so smart and that their utterly retarded opinions were remotely valid.

World=doomed.

[Drone74B]

The problem as I see it is much simpler. There are things in every day life that drive me nuts that would forever be solved if either Hillary or Obama became president.

If Hillary wins:
No woman anywhere in the US will ever be able to cry about being treated unfairly in a man's world. Next time I hear "Sob, sob, cry... I just want to be a strong and independent woman in control of my destiny without a man telling me what to do!" I can then say, "Oh yeah, you could be president! Quit your bitching!" Feminism becomes obsolete forever. Win win win.

If Obama wins:
No black person anywhere in the US will ever be able to pull the race card again, ever, ever EVER. "Damn honkey foos be keepin' a brutha down! Can't no black man no wheres get ahead up in dis beatch!" I say, "Oh yeah, you could be president! Quit your bitching!" Race card gone forever. Win win win.

Of course, the economy and other social issues might suffer for a while, but in the long term, we'd be setting the stage to wipe out so many other little nagging issues that take up way too much time and energy. After a while, we'd be moving forward again...

Note: If you're offended easily, don't read the previous three paragraphs...

[Bubba]

Revolution will not occur in this country without a significant disruption of the current order leading to a possibility of danger to a large portion of the public. The closest we've ever come in the past 100 years to revolution was the '60's. The reason for the near "revolution"? The draft, a significant disruption of the (then) current order that provided a possibility of danger to a large portion of the public.

The danger we, as a country face is not "revolution" but the soft creeping of "totalitarianism", the same as the German people faced after WW I - all we need is a little less freedom to protest the injustices of modern government, an economic or physical disaster, and a charismatic leader to "take over" and make it all better. "It can't happen here" is the most dangerous thought in the current political landscape, and it is prevalent in the wider "Average Joe" population outside of Washington, D.C., and as long as the majority of people in this country think that, then it is just a matter of time before this "Republic" of ours falls. We occupy in the modern world the same place that ancient Rome did in the classical period - and look what happened to them.

[MH]

The only 2 parts I don't believe could happen in the US are the parts where you seem to assume the US media wouldn't just tow the conservative party line, like where they make protests THE story and where Martial Law is discussed. I'm from New Zealand and I've watched enough CNN and Fox News to be fairly certain that those pieces wouldn't be discussed openly in the media. Less civil liberties would be said to equal more protection from terrorists and the protests would be either not covered or portrayed as minor and that the protestors had initiated the clashes with the police who had just been arresting the troublemakers. That'd mean that only people in the US who got news from other sources would be likely to kick up a large fuss, but they'd be the minority

[juventuscadillac]

wow, you have it right , you can even just remove McCain and put ________ "fill in the blank"

[Jim]

There has been a coup de etat. It occurred in Florida in 2000. But that was at the endf a long list of events that would make Suetonius blush.
John Kennedy was murdered. Richard Nixon was impeached because he was a psycopath surrounded by guys nuttier than himself. Gerald Ford was shot at twice. Ronald Reagan was shot by a kid from a family who personally knew Bush, the former head of the CIA. Bush Sr hijacked the US military to start a client war for the Saudi's who had given him millions. Rable rousing demogoguery attempted to cripple the Clinton presidency. A guy obviously about two steps away from being a registered sex offender is appointed special counsel and produces a report that even the republicans realize doesn't pass the smell test. But the damgae is done. GW is given the election, even though he obviously lost, by his brother who personally signed off on the theft of hundreds of millions from Fla retirement funds in the Enron theft. GW hijacks the public outrage at being so incompetent as allowing an attack on American soil to pursue a client war for the Saudi's.
Most people are too busy trying to live on sub-standard wages and the wealthy are too busy having fun to notice. There will be no revolution, the best hope for mankind has been lost to greed, stupidity and a healthy dose of ethicless will to power.

[Bob]

The part that can't happen? That liberals get the balls to do anything besides talk and throw money at a problem.

[Radwaste]

Umm, "once again, no signs of nuclear weapons production are found".

That's just wrong, Scott.
See http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Iraq/index.html

I can see an economic colla