The first thing to remember is history ALWAYS repeats itself.

Why is this? We are creatures of habit, even if its a generational thing. When hunting for this picture I saw pictures from the Russian Revolution and the oppressive regime of the Czar was replaced by the extremely oppressive regime of Stalin.

And when communism failed in Russia, no doubt this is why so much money was pumped into Russia to make sure it didn't go through a restoration of communism and who knows whether Putin is worse.

The French revolution resulted in Napoleon.

Napoleon regained power after the restoration of the monarchy in France and this was after the French revolution.

And we also are seeing in Egypt, one revolution followed by another revolution...

For those planning a revolution, especially a violent one, expect much instability afterwards, well not until you get someone who will crack down on the disorder, like Lenin did when he attacked Kronstadt.

However people don't like instability, they really do prefer peace and this is why the corporate media (MSM) kindly protects us from the wars our government is still engaged in... how many years after 9/11? How long have we been engaged in the drug war? Its better to ignore how bad things are because we really love peace and certainty. This is why we really hope we can have a peaceful revolution. Let's hope we can fix things so we don't have to miss too much work, we like the way things are so we don't have to think too much. In the words of John F Kennedy:

                            Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable.

What we want is evolution to a possible utopia. We want to move there slowly because that is the way to make things stick. This is the mechanism that the corporate types used to take control of our government, a government formed in response to the oppression of corporations.

And it seems the first American revolution failed. In the words of Thomas Jefferson:

                            The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when
                            government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.

The US govt has fallen into the hands of banks and corporations and are now forcing us into a position that we will need a violent revolution to remove the shackles that have bound us with. Will corporations precipitate the next American revolution?

So before there is a revolution we have to know very clearly where we are going because there will always be those with more or less power than us. Banks and corporations have the power now because money is what everyone is chasing. When physical strength is important, men become powerful because they are stronger. When children are important, women become powerful because they give birth and care for them. If you want to build armies increase poverty and make babies more important than women. If the most important thing in the world is kindness, people would be kind to each other.

The ultimate mechanism for destroying power is to make something else more important than what has power now. Well that is one solution. The other solution is education.

So on the road to bringing down the whole system I recommend going step by careful step because we don't want to cause something much more oppressive. Each change we make will bring unintended consequences.

The second thing to remember is reverting societies to what has gone before is difficult because Pandora’s box has been opened and its next to impossible to put genies back into bottles. We aren't going back to a smaller tribal world unless something changes our communication systems or trading mechanisms. We aren't going to give up our technology, often touted as the cause of our problems, it is not. We are the cause of our problems.

As some are aware I talk to people of all political persuasions. I note that the left/progressives tend to talk about fixing the current system, but libertarians/anarcho-types tend to only talk about the utopia that will exist once government has been removed but seldom talk about how to move from where we are now to how to their utopian destination.

Because left/progressives are usually thinking about making incremental changes, it usually drives the libertarian/anarcho-types crazy because they see us as being obsessed with government and claim that we are worshipping it etc etc and then everyone rolls their eyes at the others stupidity.

IMO left/progressives tend to be as dismayed by the state of government as libertarian/anarcho-types are.

The problem is communicating our respective frames of reference to each other.

And my impression is that utopia for libertarian/anarcho-types is very similar to what we have now, except with no government ( and the left version is optionally no corporations). My impression is the utopia for left/progressives is a society where govt controls the corporations.

Perhaps libertarian/anarcho-types have the road map to a government/corporate free world but they have been strangely quiet in sharing it with me.

My concern is taking out government is not enough because we have to know what is going wrong now to make sure we don't get something twice as bad in its place, because this is the reality and has been demonstrated time and time again. There are plenty of examples of once functioning countries that lost their government and the system now in place is far worse than what they originally had, such as Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq, just to name a few.

While there may have been functioning societies without the spectacle of government, they mostly disintegrated when they came into contact with societies with an organized government. For the most part, I think western society of the 99% is tribal, we are split into families, and our society is a classic anarchical society. The government is for the 1%. They are organized, plan ahead, educated and also tribal and they use our government.

One of the things humans do scarily well is generalize. You know "This is what those kinds of people do".

I know I have been called out because I've said "libertarians are like this" and then there is outrage amongst libertarians when I do that. Then its kind of amusing when those very same libertarians turn around and generalize about classes of people I group myself loosely with.

And I know there would be absolute hysteria if vast portions of the population were considered to be in total agreement with the current and previous US governments.

But this is largely how we view Israel. Some how the west has this vision that Israeli's all support the actions of the Israeli government.

You get the idea. We may be all Americans but we don't consider the government representing us or its behaviour. Yet many people persist in lumping people together.

Specifically, feminists. There are all kinds of women saying all kinds of things about feminism and they do not necessarily represent all feminists. Some feminists may say they hate men, but no doubt there were women who hated men before there ever was a feminist movement. And while I consider myself a feminist, I do not hate men nor consider them my enemy and I am certainly not a feminist who hates men. I love men. If that wasn't made abundantly clear in this post, I don't what will convince you.

This absurd group on facebook love to perpetuate the myth that 'all' feminists hate men. My opinion is men and women need each other. We are designed to be a team. I am certain there are women who want to be single or be with a female partner, like men, women have diverse needs and wants too. What I want feminism to do is to let women have as many options as men so that society will be a better place for all of us. As it is clear when we compare and contrast societies, western society is clearly better than societies were women have less power.

It is my opinion also that feminism will ultimately lead to the liberation of men too. Why? because I think the stereotypes of men can be as debilitating for men as they are for women.  Classically, men have to be heroes, be brave all the time, never feel fear or pain, men must know everything, should never need help unless its totally guy, like borrowing a tool to lift a new motor into the car, never need directions, never be emotional, never need anyone to be there for them or for support, never need affection, never be weak... That must be tough on men! I am sure there are more classical stereotypes men must conform to too. Feel free to tell me.

To me feminism is purely about allowing me and my sisters the liberty of have more than the long-term occupation of housewife and mother. Some women want to be something other than nurse, school teacher, or hair dresser and be rewarded equally rather than thought badly for accomplishment. Women are told their whole life that eventually some man will come along.

But I think the stereotypes are mainly in place because of video games, television and the movie industries. Men have to always be self-reliant, brave and emotion-less on TV, movies and especially in video games. Woman might come in the end where she's young and beautiful and the man gets her as a reward at the end of the film. Very seldom do we see functioning marriages on TV, in movies and especially never on video games.

These industries are turning us into stereotypes so they can sell us stuff. Turning us into stereotypes is better for 1% business because that way they don't have to make a wide variety of stuff for us to purchase, they can churn out the same old pap and we'll eat it up because we want to identify with the main character.

On amazon there is a search criteria called 'billionaire romance' and it brings up 209 pages of search results. No wonder men want to get rich, but the tragic thing is there is little else for women to read but romance novels. No wonder women want to get married (to rich men) - all they read about is women getting married to rich men.

The same phenomena is no doubt in place for boys with video games. There are a variety of game types but many of the games involve male characters shooting up monsters or bad guys or whatever and at the end of it the guy feels like a hero for successfully accomplishing a mission. He would get a chick ordinarily, but that would involve dealing with a woman and why do that when you can simply rape her instead. As we see in the picture above.

No doubt some of the kids are saying they'd rape her because of peer-group pressure, and that would make them manly men... right? This is the problem of stereotypes again. More than likely most of these guys would just sleep on the floor. But would all of them? Defenceless people are treated badly. It is groups like the men's right group on facebook that dismiss rape statistics yet there is clear evidence that there is a strong rape culture present in the country, where confessed rapists get a bit of a tut-tut. Yet many women I know have told me they were raped yet they never reported it. Why, well clearly why put yourself through the ordeal? The police don't believe you and if you can get to go to court the rapist even if he confesses or there is a lot of evidence against him results in merely a slap on the wrists as this guy got a mere 30 days jail time! I am sure some women fabricate rape claims to hurt men, this article estimates that the women who report a rape, those numbers are between 2%-8% and 90,000 people reported being raped in 2008. Clearly rape is happening in the US. Just because some people may falsely accuse someone of raping them, it doesn't mean no rape is happening at all.

There is another advantage the 1% have in perpetuating divisions in society, it keeps people buying stuff. If you aren't in a caring/loving relationship, you are more likely to fill the voids in your life by spending. Spending money is our big distraction, our new opiate. Don't hate women because they want more options available to them. Because women don't hate men because the women don't want to be teachers/nurses or hair dressers. Even women who've been raped don't necessarily hate men.