On violence as a means to power.

In my adopted hometown, there were anti-choice protestors outside our county courthouse, protesting against women's rights of course. The more I thought about it, I began analyzing the types of protesting. Some anti-choice people are more prone to go out and actually adopt unwanted children instead of just bitching (a practice I have more respect for than the usual sexists). Others, the hypocrites, will drive car bombs into abortion clinics, killing doctors, pregnant women, and their fetuses, all in the name of stopping abortion. I don't make sense of it, but I'm not trying to.

What I'm more looking at, is the lack of those on the left and those in the labour unions to use violence as a means of change. While an anti-violent stance is considered the basis of educational programs in modern day America, look at our military and the relentless wars it wages on other nations, sometimes for no reason at all. Is violence really that looked down upon? Yes and no.

Violence, throughout it's historical and permanent existence, has managed to bring to power almost everyone. The Bolsheviki, the Iranian Revolution, Chavez's presidency, the Cuban Revolution were all won through violence. This isn't senseless violence and the pillage of women and children, but rather the removal of the fascists who's positions of power hold that majoriy back. When one aristocratic regime holds back the people of the nation from getting bread and peace, civil war must be fought to fix this problem.

It can be as simple as taking over a palace or as grand as rallying the workers into a large guerilla unit, capable of forcing down the oppressors. However, what we must look at now, is America and it's type of situation and point in history.

The American people are generally peaceful, not by morals, but by laziness. The politicians above us have made us weak by limiting our power to reform and voting during the seasons. Corporate tentacles, with their hydra like abilities, have managed to make many of us fat and unhealthy, addicted to their constant stream of slaughtered animal and nicotine hits. Those of us that are willing to fight are fought and piled on with laws and restrictions, making the possibilities of a strike so limited and hard to pull of that a police state is almost in place.

On May 1 of 2006, the immigrants, legal and "illegal" of America, came together to demand workers' rights. While their turnout was impressive, inspiring and wonderful to see, it could have turned out much better. With the allying of the American proletariat to that of the South American proletariat, an international rebellion horn could have been sounded on that day, sending the common man to the streets in unison, gun, knife, brick, stick, hammer, or whatever in hand, ready to fight the fascists. Again though, we see the American public subdued by an unwillingness to be aggressive in change.

In a utopian scenario, one can see the United State aristocracy slashing workers' rights like usual, only to be met with the proletariat in the streets, demanding change. No petitions, no week long protests. No bitching Congress. Just a simple demand of change. While the chances of this change being met are slim, an option B stands up in the foglight. Sudden and random outburts from the men and women of middle and lower America. Nation wide strikes. Corporate headquarters being burned. Gunfights with the authorities, that have some of their own, fleeing to join their working comrades in battle. With change still nowhere in site, the revolutionaries storm Congress, dissolving it and sitting in on their own decisions.

Will it ever go like this? If I have it my way, in my lifetime, people will start to change their ways of viewing things. Why not? "The proletariat have nothing to lose but their chains." -Karl Marx