‘Violence Will Be Necessary to Achieve Our Goals’
Are they really that stupid?
Posted on 12/19/2012 6:07:33 AM PST by combat_boots
Citizen journalist Ringo captured this speaker at the Occupy Los Angeles camp a few days ago letting the cat out of the bag: After dismissing nonviolence as a dead end, he admits that for the Occupiers to achieve their goals, violence and bloodshed will be necessary:
(video)
Here’s a transcript, starting at 32 seconds into the video:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Occupy L.A. Speaker: “One of the speakers said the solution is nonviolent movement. No, my friend. I’ll give you two examples: French Revolution, and Indian so-called Revolution.
Gandhi, Gandhi today is, with respect to all of you, Gandhi today is a tumor that the ruling class is using constantly to mislead us. French Revolution made fundamental transformation. But it was bloody.
India, the result of Gandhi, is 600 million people living in maximum poverty.
So, ultimately, the bourgeoisie won’t go without violent means. Revolution! Yes, revolution that is led by the working class.
Long live revolution! Long live socialism!”
Crowd: [Cheers.]
Incredibly, he praises the massacres of the French Revolution’s Reign of Terror rather than Gandhi’s nonviolent philosophy.
And the crowd laps it up.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
What does FAA mean in that first sign pictured, maybe I’m reading it wrong. “Death to capitalism FAA??” Federal Aviation Administration??
No idea
And there was so much political incorrectness in that statement by Bernhard that if someone on the right had said it regarding a female on the left, the spluttering from the left would have soaked a mattress with them not knowing where to begin in their outrage, on so many levels. But it’s forgotten now by everyone, left and right, even as Limbaugh-even Limbagh-bowed the knee and apologised for calling a self-admitted slut, a slut.
‘Violence Will Be Necessary to Achieve Our Goals’
Are they really that stupid?
This moron thinks he knows what happened in France and India, but he’s as clueless about them as a person who thinks Paul Revere rode to Fort Sumter in 1861.
Even if we bizarrely pretend that the executions during the Reign of Terror were somehow good stuff, the fact remains that the French Revolution was a failure that produced an unworkable government and resulted in a dictator calling himself an Emperor. In fact, the Emperor who caused Europe to burn with his unnecessary wars of conquest was a supporter of the Jacobin faction that birthed the Reign of Terror. Meanwhile, the republic that Ghandi helped establish is not only still in existence and stable 70 years on, for a time it was socialist in its outlook and was very Soviet friendly, using MiGs pretty much exclusively as its front line fighters, for instance.
They know the media will protect them, and academia will teach other people’s children that people on the left in history who resorted to acts of violence were heroes, even as they use that double-think they’re so good at to make those on the right devils from hell for mere language-ie, it’s the right’s fault as “bullies” when a sodomite says “goodbye cruel world”. Even if that “bullying” consists of no more than standing by Biblical convictions. You can tell that they’re merely cynically using that as a weapon, because they never call out Muslims for actually calling for their deaths.
The left is a coalition of anyone who opposes white, male, Christian society. If that were ever done away with, I wonder who the crocodile would eat next.
Great website there, thanks for the link. His “Today’s Hipster Beating”s are a guilty pleasure.
LLS
“Then these same kinds of losers turn around and scream for gun bans.”
There is a correlation between civil disarmament and Communist revolutions.
If you were planning a violent takeover, wouldn’t you want to disarm your enemy first? Then you can use a mob armed with bats and pieces of rebar to achieve your goals.
the French Revolution
The American revolution was toward something positive. They studied history and managed toward something positive.
I could be wrong.
All of these One World Government types, the Club of Rome, and the UN's main weapon is to use the environment as a means of cutting world population down to have just enough people to do the work and support those big richies that think they deserve to be running the planet. I know all this stuff sounds like conspiracy theories, etc., but there is way too much out there to prove this stuff true. Just go to the UN site and look up Agenda 21 on their web site. Tighten your shorts when you read it. Disarming us is one of their main goals. They know without that they cannot rule us. America is their biggest target right now. Obama is their man to do it.
Unreal
Yes, it was surely demonic. I have supported the death penalty since I was old enough to understand what it was, but I never take pleasure in even the worst criminal’s exit, not because I’m some great moral actor but because it just feels wrong. It’s difficult for me to imagine the emotional state people must have been in to actually revel in those executions.
Revolution may be the only way to save this country but our side will NEVER start it.
But we can finish it. We can’t give up our country to a bunch of unwashed, immoral, Godless scum. We have the occupiers against us, the progressive media against us, and the president against us all because we believe in our constitution and our freedoms that come with it. I say, bring it.
No, you’re dead on. The desire to change without any real plan to change is reflected in the way they went about changing stuff that didn’t need to be altered, like renaming all the months. At the core was not just a rejection of monarchy or classism, but a rejection of God.
In america, even Founders who weren’t Christians rejected God and His laws and made it clear morality would be the foundation stone of their republic. In France, the revolutionaries gave God the finger. A rise to power and prosperity followed for one nation and blood-letting, incompetence, tyranny and endless war followed for the other. Not surprising in the least, really.
Grima Wormtongue
Robespierre, the most violent fell under the guillotine which ushered in the Direcrtory and very shortly thereafter, Napoleon.
The history of revolutions, except for ours is always the same, but these OWS idiots don't study history do they.
This ignoramous doesn’t seem to know that there was violence in India, on a massive scale, only after Britain left. Gandhi may have been peaceful, surely, but he was freakin’ assassinated.
As tot the mumbo-jumbo about how there should have been violence because India’s still poor, therefore that’s proof the capitalists are still in control, what?!? First of all, India is getting rich before our eyes. The reason they haven’t by now, more than anything else, is for decades after independence they were socialists.
Okay, let’s take a look at some of the countries that did murder the middle class. Take the Soviet Union, please. How rich were they?
I fail to see what pictures of shooting victims would mean, intellectually at least. Either they had it coming, or the best way to have avoided it would have been to have made a shooting victim of the guy who shot you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
