Twink (
Sat, 3 Jan 1998 20:38:26 -0500 (EST)

At 03:19 PM 1/3/98 -0700, Mark D. Fulwiler <> wrote:
>To digress a bit-take the Oklahoma City bombers- please. What cowardly
morons! Do
>they try to take out anyone important? (I am not advocating this.) Nope, they
>indiscriminately kill innocent children and low level government officials.
>they didn't have the sense to realize that in order to start a violent
>you need about a third of the population on your side to have any chance at
>George Washington, for example, had about a third of the colonists on his
side and
>he knew damned well that there was a hangman's noose in store for him if he
lost. He
>took full responsibility for what he was doing. You don't see many people
of such
>high character these days. Yes, he had his major faults-he owned slaves(
which, to
>his credit, he freed after his death) and he wasn't a pure libertarian, but
the man
>had mostly good principles and a lot of courage. Contrast William Jefferson
(I gag
>associating him with our 3rd President) Clinton. But back to the topic at

I disagree on the one-third-of-the-populace-behind-them argument. I think you
need much less, but you also must be certain that the rest of the people are
united and don't care. In other words, if 10% of the people support you and
the will and dough while the rest have neither and don't care, I think you'd
have a
good chance. The problem is that today most people who contemplate revolution
are not the sort of people I'd like to see succeed. In fact, they look a
little too much
like the current rulers! (Recall Timothy McVeigh was a decorated veteran of the
Persian Gulf War.)

In real life, I'd rather see a revolution of the peaceful sort, especially
of changing
enough people over to our side. And keep others neutral. Someone once said,
no everyone needed to be enlightened during the Enlightenment, and look what
came from that. (Can you tell me who said this?:)

But my original point was that there is a difference between morality and
legality --
or what is right and wrong and what should be up to the law -- whether enforced
by a government or what have you -- to decide. Does anyone agree with me
on this?

Daniel Ust