Long comment incoming that no one will see but you probably lmao, TL;DR at the end.
I took a class on political violence last year, and in it we covered civil wars, insurgencies, etc. What you're talking about is the "rebel's dilemma." It basically asks the question "why would someone join a rebellion/fight against the government?" It doesn't make logical sense for any individual to join of their own free will, because there are four outcomes that will come of the rebellion when looking at an individual's choice to join or not:
Join the rebellion and the rebellion succeeds -> Individual gets whatever they were seeking (usually freedom of some kind) at the cost of manpower, money/capital, and time.
Join the rebellion and the rebellion fails -> Rebels are rounded up and the individual winds up dead or punished by the government.
Don't join the rebellion and the rebellion fails -> Everything goes back to normal with no cost or risk whatsoever to the individual.
Don't join the rebellion and the rebellion succeeds -> The individual gains new freedoms (or whatever the rebellion was fighting for) for absolutely no cost to themselves.
Logically it doesn't make any sense for any individual to join a rebel group because it involves a ton of work and resources and puts the individual at great risk if the rebellion fails. Solving the rebel's dilemma has obviously been a huge problem for rebel groups throughout history. The easiest example is to look at the Revolution and see what the Founding Fathers did: they paid the troops, offered them land, and offered them freedom if they were slaves or indentured servants (same thing happened in the Cuban Revolution).
Of course some people will fight for a cause they strongly believe in (probably most people on this board), but that's not enough to form a strong movement by itself, you need to give some kind of incentive to push more people over the fence to join you in your fight because people are sacrificing a lot to join you. I think this is why the BLM movement was able to gain traction (especially this year), because people had been forced out of work due to the China virus so no one needs to worry about getting fired (much lower risk to oneself) and, of course, many were paid to go around torching cities for BLM and Antifa through Soros.
"3# Don't join the rebellion and the rebellion fails -> Everything goes back to normal with no cost or risk whatsoever to the individual."
If you truly believe there will be no cost you are either niave or just uniformed.
There is a huge cost to "everyone involved". The greatest generation paid it when they charged the beaches through chest deep water with machine guns (as described by my grandfather) cutting down the guys in front, behind and on either side of you. They were fighting an existential threat in a war that would determine not only the future of the nation but of the entire world, and the fought to protect their families and their buddies on each side of them. That spirit still exist today among a majority regardless of what the media says. We will do what must be done, whatever the cost, exactly as they did. Ronald Reagan "A time for choosing", It describes the exact choice we face today.
We romanticize WW2, but remember that it took a LOT of propaganda to get the US into the war. Had Pearl Harbor not been bombed, we likely would have not joined the effort until there was a directed threat.
The results were desirable, but the government dragged the soldiers into those trenches and into the D-Day invasion. We the people weren't rushing headlong into the fire for the sake of Europe or for the sake of assured freedom.
The American people are live and let live and isolationist by a large majority. And 100 years of war since WW2, each declared urgently necessary, hasn't done anything to sweeten intervention in world affairs among the population.
And now, by optics, those that say America First are grinding for war. We aren't trying to overcome the Rebel's Dilemma as brought up by mspm, we are trying to overcome the three generations of inertial frustration with war mongering politicians.
How should I take it? Are you implying that Americans hunger to spill the blood of their kin, but not of the outsider? The opposite?Perhaps that rebellion is not a war, but is somehow different?
American's taste for war is as a last resort. Whether that war is on our soil or on the soil a world away doesn't change much on that view. We haven't even approached the average person's internal cost:benefit calculation as defined by the Rebel's Dilemma - we are still in the phase of opposing the concept of war.
The problem with the WWII comparison is that WWII wasn't a rebellion. I agree that if the plan fails (which I don't think it's failing right now) there will definitely be a high price to pay if we allow an illegitimate Biden administration to run the country, but the point of the rebel's dilemma is that you don't need to convince either of us to join in the fight, it's the people on the edge that think they have a lot to lose by joining in a rebellion if it fails. Why give up everything you have now if the rebellion succeeds and you get all the benefits anyway? That's really the question that recruiters need to overcome when trying to find new members.
So what yuou are saying is if we join and win those who sat on their asses become slaves. Since they are likely the reason shit went south to begin with theybare only going to head back to being enslaved. Join or die must be a rebellions motto then. No free rides.
That's why rebel movements have given rewards to those that join and help them. Money/land/capital, threats, propaganda, government positions, voting rights, there are a lot of different ways you can make joining the cause seem worth it for those on the fence. But if we're fighting for freedom do you think enslaving people would be a good idea? That would be enough for me to leave and start my own movement.
Long comment incoming that no one will see but you probably lmao, TL;DR at the end.
I took a class on political violence last year, and in it we covered civil wars, insurgencies, etc. What you're talking about is the "rebel's dilemma." It basically asks the question "why would someone join a rebellion/fight against the government?" It doesn't make logical sense for any individual to join of their own free will, because there are four outcomes that will come of the rebellion when looking at an individual's choice to join or not:
Join the rebellion and the rebellion succeeds -> Individual gets whatever they were seeking (usually freedom of some kind) at the cost of manpower, money/capital, and time.
Join the rebellion and the rebellion fails -> Rebels are rounded up and the individual winds up dead or punished by the government.
Don't join the rebellion and the rebellion fails -> Everything goes back to normal with no cost or risk whatsoever to the individual.
Don't join the rebellion and the rebellion succeeds -> The individual gains new freedoms (or whatever the rebellion was fighting for) for absolutely no cost to themselves.
Logically it doesn't make any sense for any individual to join a rebel group because it involves a ton of work and resources and puts the individual at great risk if the rebellion fails. Solving the rebel's dilemma has obviously been a huge problem for rebel groups throughout history. The easiest example is to look at the Revolution and see what the Founding Fathers did: they paid the troops, offered them land, and offered them freedom if they were slaves or indentured servants (same thing happened in the Cuban Revolution).
Of course some people will fight for a cause they strongly believe in (probably most people on this board), but that's not enough to form a strong movement by itself, you need to give some kind of incentive to push more people over the fence to join you in your fight because people are sacrificing a lot to join you. I think this is why the BLM movement was able to gain traction (especially this year), because people had been forced out of work due to the China virus so no one needs to worry about getting fired (much lower risk to oneself) and, of course, many were paid to go around torching cities for BLM and Antifa through Soros.
TL;DR: You're referring to the "rebel's dilemma."
"3# Don't join the rebellion and the rebellion fails -> Everything goes back to normal with no cost or risk whatsoever to the individual." If you truly believe there will be no cost you are either niave or just uniformed. There is a huge cost to "everyone involved". The greatest generation paid it when they charged the beaches through chest deep water with machine guns (as described by my grandfather) cutting down the guys in front, behind and on either side of you. They were fighting an existential threat in a war that would determine not only the future of the nation but of the entire world, and the fought to protect their families and their buddies on each side of them. That spirit still exist today among a majority regardless of what the media says. We will do what must be done, whatever the cost, exactly as they did. Ronald Reagan "A time for choosing", It describes the exact choice we face today.
We romanticize WW2, but remember that it took a LOT of propaganda to get the US into the war. Had Pearl Harbor not been bombed, we likely would have not joined the effort until there was a directed threat.
The results were desirable, but the government dragged the soldiers into those trenches and into the D-Day invasion. We the people weren't rushing headlong into the fire for the sake of Europe or for the sake of assured freedom.
The American people are live and let live and isolationist by a large majority. And 100 years of war since WW2, each declared urgently necessary, hasn't done anything to sweeten intervention in world affairs among the population.
And now, by optics, those that say America First are grinding for war. We aren't trying to overcome the Rebel's Dilemma as brought up by mspm, we are trying to overcome the three generations of inertial frustration with war mongering politicians.
Ww2 wasn't a rebellion
This is a "coke isn't water" comment.
How should I take it? Are you implying that Americans hunger to spill the blood of their kin, but not of the outsider? The opposite?Perhaps that rebellion is not a war, but is somehow different?
American's taste for war is as a last resort. Whether that war is on our soil or on the soil a world away doesn't change much on that view. We haven't even approached the average person's internal cost:benefit calculation as defined by the Rebel's Dilemma - we are still in the phase of opposing the concept of war.
The problem with the WWII comparison is that WWII wasn't a rebellion. I agree that if the plan fails (which I don't think it's failing right now) there will definitely be a high price to pay if we allow an illegitimate Biden administration to run the country, but the point of the rebel's dilemma is that you don't need to convince either of us to join in the fight, it's the people on the edge that think they have a lot to lose by joining in a rebellion if it fails. Why give up everything you have now if the rebellion succeeds and you get all the benefits anyway? That's really the question that recruiters need to overcome when trying to find new members.
So what yuou are saying is if we join and win those who sat on their asses become slaves. Since they are likely the reason shit went south to begin with theybare only going to head back to being enslaved. Join or die must be a rebellions motto then. No free rides.
That's why rebel movements have given rewards to those that join and help them. Money/land/capital, threats, propaganda, government positions, voting rights, there are a lot of different ways you can make joining the cause seem worth it for those on the fence. But if we're fighting for freedom do you think enslaving people would be a good idea? That would be enough for me to leave and start my own movement.
BLM & Antifa insurgency never experienced what a true rebel faced. It would have been over day one.
Absolutely, they're in the very beginning of the creation of an insurgency, but since the deep state wants them they're facing no consequences at all.