Is America approaching a time of armed revolution?

Yes.

26 (48.1%)

No.

22 (40.7%)

Other, explain.

6 (11.1%)

Total Members Voted: 20

[YixilTesiphon]

Well, hopefully it won't come to that, but if it does, awesome.

[mrapplecastle]

why go through the trouble of saving up a bunch of money to "buy" some land that the gov. can take away from you whenever they want.  Even if they dont take it away from you, you still have to pay the gov rent for the rest of your life..........it doesnt seem like a very good time to buy property in amerika
so I'm not sure if you can truly own some land, but you can definitely rent some 

[YixilTesiphon]

Well, since we're postulating that the government will collapse in on itself, it will no longer be capable of taking your land. You'll only have to deal with local police departments and roving fragments of the military. Eventually these will cancel each other out and free-market defense associations will develop, most likely in states with lots of civilian arms (Texas, New Hampshire, Alaska).

[Evil Muppet]

How often does something like that ever occur?  Almost always such a situation is solved by a dictatorship. 

[YixilTesiphon]

The entire world will fall into chaos when the economy collapses. The Internet might even temporarily die. America is way too motherfucking big for a dictatorship to arise out of chaos to cover it. More likely, local chiefs of police and such will try to create their chiefdoms, and those of us who don't worship the State will create our own militias to defend our properties, eventually economically overtaking and crushing the dictatorial fiefdoms.

[adamruth]

Seems to be the only way you can get your freedom is from a revolt. If there is any validity behind these claims: THE UNITED STATES IS STILL A BRITISH COLONY. Then it is even more pressing that a revolt is made and not only against the US government but against britain itself.

Have you read that document?  I only read first 20 or so pages, the author is completely on crack.

[Evil Muppet]

how long after the collapse of the economy do you think cannibalism and roving gangs of road hooligans start terrorizing everyone? 

[Johnny_]

how long after the collapse of the economy do you think cannibalism and roving gangs of road hooligans start terrorizing everyone? 

Cannibalism? 

They're might be some roving gangs, hell, I'm sure there will be.  But in absence of rule of law, people will fight against them with lethal force, or form together with their neighbors into some kind of watch.  Like having a large bell in the middle of the town to alert people to danger.

[Evil Muppet]

well hopefully cod pieces come back into fashion after the collapse of the economy. 

[lordmetroid]

Seems to be the only way you can get your freedom is from a revolt. If there is any validity behind these claims: THE UNITED STATES IS STILL A BRITISH COLONY. Then it is even more pressing that a revolt is made and not only against the US government but against britain itself.

Have you read that document?  I only read first 20 or so pages, the author is completely on crack.

I've read a little bit and I also brought forth the Declaration of Independence, the Treaty of Paris, the Treaty of Ghent and studied them. I don't know what to believe or not. It seems indeed he is on crack or something. The whole claim seems to be bullshit but this piece of legislation, Statutory Rule 1997 No. 339 The Social Security (United States of America) Order (Northern Ireland) 1997, leaves me wondering just what is the history behind it and if it is worth a further pursuit of research in order to better understand the juridical matters. The piece of legislation itself seems to be not much of a problem. But I never heard of anything like this before. Although Social security has been imposed on all western countries by UN which could explain this anomaly in legislation.

Hence that leaves me to wonder if the claim might possibly be true. Until recently I thought all the 50 states was the United States of America. But as I find out only the original 13 states are part of the union and the rest are territory under congress rule and the people born on territory of United States, immigrants(possibly) and black people are not "We the People" but are federal citizens which only have privileges granted by congress rather than unalienable rights. There is a slight possibility that what I have learned from common knowledge is not the real truth this time neither. But I agree it doesn't seem plausible.

I am still going to do some research on the subject and treaties though. At least I will naturalize myself with the juridical, politics and history of America. Something which I have come to enjoy very much these days. I am quite found of it actually. It is interesting and fun to learn about the history and the law.

[error]

how long after the collapse of the economy do you think cannibalism and roving gangs of road hooligans start terrorizing everyone? 

We already have roving gangs of road hooligans terrorizing everyone. They drive funny cars with weird blue lights on top.

If the government collapsed, we'd have a lot less violence.

[adamruth]

The whole claim seems to be bullshit but this piece of legislation, Statutory Rule 1997 No. 339 The Social Security (United States of America) Order (Northern Ireland) 1997, leaves me wondering just what is the history behind it and if it is worth a further pursuit of research in order to better understand the juridical matters. The piece of legislation itself seems to be not much of a problem. But I never heard of anything like this before. Although Social security has been imposed on all western countries by UN which could explain this anomaly in legislation.

It's quite simple and very obvious that he never actually read it. The title made it look like Great Britain was making law for the United States and that was enough for him.  It's simply a treaty set between Great Britain, Northern Irleland, and the U.S. (actually, it's an ammendment to an existing treaty between Northern Ireland and the UK) that allows for Social Security benefits to be paid while people are living in a different country.  I'm guessing that if you have Social Security and are living outside the U.S. you lose some or all of those benefits.  But with this treaty you can live in Northern Ireland or the UK and keep your benefits, and vice versa.

I've read some more of his document and it doesn't even rise to the level of wrong.  I want whatever he's smoking.

[aquabanianskakid]

I want a cod piece damnit! And feathery plumes coming off my shoulders.

[Evil Muppet]

The size of your Cod piece denotes your rank.  The bigger and more ornate your cod piece, the higher your rank. 

[AbsurdParadox]

It depends on how you define "approach". Will it happen in the indeterminate future? Sure. Will it happen in the next 10 years? I really, really doubt it. In 50 years? Possibly, but I think its too soon to guess. We may never need one, which is the idea.

I see very very large problems in groups of those who would be on the rebelling side of the revolution. Many are idealists and dreamers, that expect large scale changes that require mind-set changes in the average american to happen in short periods, and won't accept any less. The groups are highly disorganized (I for one know only ONE other Libertarian here in Kansas, for example). Many people are Libertarians, and more so Anarchists, out of Image and not Principle. Hardly anyone who is NOT a Libertarian takes being a Libertarian seriously. I've been browsing the forum for only an hour or so, but I can see the things I mentioned prevalent even here. Not abundantly so, but still...