[chaostheory]

This is what I love about America: we have periodic, bloodless revolutions that can be initiated and carried out by anyone. The social order keeps changing without the chaos, destruction, and waste of violent upheavals or coups. Isn't this what both Marx and Mao have always wanted? What they both didn't realize was that you need a functioning democracy with freedom of speech (and the Internet) to achieve it.

[theha343432]

Would you mind explaining this more? It's a interesting idea. What do you think causes this or allows it to happen? Did you think of this or is it taken from somewhere?

[chaostheory]

Yeah imo I could be wrong but this was the intent of America's forefathers.

"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical." TJ

1. our country was created and formed by dissidents and rebels. Rebellion is really ingrained into our culture. If you look at our history in business, arts, and even technology; you can see that it is really pervassive and our non-obvious main competitive advantage

2. Democratic republics allow our society to have bloodless revolutions by voting out leaders we don't like. It happens so often that these bloodless revolutions become the norm and its effects go beyond just politicians

3. Obvious to some but not to everyone, since not everyone on HN lives in a democracy, but freedom of speech allows us to say and write whatever is on our minds - also giving us a Free Press, which makes bloodless rebellions more likely (and violent overthrows much less likely)

Combine the above ingredients and you get constant, non-destructive revolutions. Add a ubiquitous and currently open & free platform called the Internet and you get the current state of things.

When you think about it, it's a win / win for everyone, because even if you are one of the people getting overthrown; you're not going to get killed unlike in other countries

[api]

Agreed until you got to the Marx and Mao part, which is a bit "WUT?"

[chaostheory]

Why? Am I wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution

To be clear, you do realize that I'm criticizing both Marx and Mao right?

[allenz]

You're taking them out of context. Marx didn't want revolution for revolution's sake. He had a specific change to the social order in mind, namely the cause of socialism. He wouldn't approve of the US.

[chaostheory]

So you're saying that the Women's Suffrage movement changed nothing? The Civil Rights movement didn't have any effect? The Sexual Revolution did little? What about the unions? I can go on. Are you saying that none of our bloodless revolutions made any changes to the social order?

[snakeboy]

They both wanted social revolution, but the execution of their plans lead to tens of millions of unnecessary deaths.