[Shoh3pif]

> I, as a concerned citizen can do nothing against the corporations ruling our society

Defenestrations, torches and pitchforks have been traditional solutions to rulers not acting in the interest of the populace.

Of course more peaceful means are preferable but the option needs to be kept on the table to remember why we have and want democratic solutions in the first place.

[sk5t]

It seems unlikely that the proletariat will overthrow the government because that government has not curtailed their own ability to buy plastic goods, drive a car, or set the air conditioning at 65F.

[akuji1993]

At least for my country, you can scream as loud as you want, people just complain about you being louder than the Television. Nothing will happen, because governments have kept the majority of the people at a low enough education that they either don't understand or don't care about these things at all. I can always see people zoning out when I talk to them about this topic. Nobody cares, because they know they won't make a difference if they do anyway.

[Buldak]

>Defenestrations, torches and pitchforks have been traditional solutions to rulers not acting in the interest of the populace.

I'd guess the people involved in those rebellions felt the effects of bad governance much more acutely and directly than people do (currently ...) vis-à-vis climate change.

[_oeas]

Current leading governments are too corrupt to be able to change anything by peaceful talks

[Shoh3pif]

Even the chinese government recognized that at least doing something about the coal smog is something in their own interest. My understanding is that the risk of civil unrest is what drives them.

[SmellyGeekBoy]

The driver seems to be the economic incentive of becoming the world leader in renewables by getting a head start while the rest of the world drags its feet. Say what you will about authoritarian governments but they can certainly get shit done.

[mywittyname]

This will happen. It's actually already happening in developing countries.

The disruption of food supplies has been causing annual riots all over the world. The US has remained insulated from these effects by virtue of being relatively rich and relying on over-priced, highly processed foods that have enough margin to buffer against price shocks. But this is clearly an untenable situation.

Shit goes south really fast when people can't afford to eat. And the difference between Mexican or Middle Eastern food riots and American ones is that Americans will come with lots of guns.

[SmellyGeekBoy]

Trouble is the government will make sure that the police and military remain well fed, and they have even bigger guns.

[ripsawridge]

I actually think this huge block of gun owners in America share a particular mindset with each other that means they'll become the local arm of the government in the hinterland.

Just as you always see affinity between police forces and right-wing activists, you'll see the government put on a face friendly to rural gun culture, and that group will be installed as enforcers.

So I don't buy this argument that the wide availability of guns in America in any way ensures a "Freedman's Paradise." It ensures more oppression, as the (expensive) arm of Federal power recedes.

[mywittyname]

I'm hardly an advocate of the typical right-wing position that guns keep the government in check.

But I do foresee a situation where there's a clash between the well-fed police (who want to keep it that way) and the starving poor in the US. The inner city riots will not be an issue, most metro PDs have experienced and well equipped riot control departments.

It's the armed, rural uprisings that pose a threat. Think Cliven Bundy-types leading a group of protestors in sieges of government or office buildings.