Since Trump surrender, all the yells are quiet, and all the panic turned apathy. This is normal, this is how every rebellion lacking ideology ends up - people raise to express their disappointment, but as this move is spontaneous and not organized, emotions blow the lid and turn into vapor. Then the pot keeps boiling until the next opportunity makes suffering unbearable, bringing people to the streets.
Now, how could these series of protests be shaped in a meaningful, organized movement, pursuing and achieving political goals - ultimate one of these being taking power and driving a nation in a direction matching the will of those strong enough to express it?
Well, first of all, a nation is needed. Not just a territory, not a pile of paperwork with some logos - a nation as a cultural phenomenon, uniting people by defined rejection and acceptance.
For example, those who disagree with elections steal may deny the usurper, and accept the democratic system as the only way of choosing the personalities directing governing efforts of their nation.
Or, large groups of people could strongly disagree with dilution of their culture by masses of incompatible ones, and accept exclusively the values of their native - or adopted - culture.
Or, considerable sized crowd could want to express its rejection of the globalist world model - with its corporate-driven economic clusters, and agglomerations of fully enslaved sheep - and embrace a traditional model of nation-based world division, all the way down to states and families, with independent and free individuals at the core.
The basics required to turn such combos of rejection and acceptance into actionable core values, are simple:
- Clear, explicit, and widely distributed foundational statements shaping the group. "We deny this, this and that. We want such, such and such". That must be printed on leaflets, written on the walls, carried on the banners during the civil unrest
- Groups of people openly accepting these statements, and assuming a naturally born, popular name - bearing consequences of being singled out as a group member by potentially violent and aggressive adversaries
- Territories where these groups could assemble, join resources, and organize for action - that implying definitive sacrifice of the current lifestyle towards desired one, for each group member who joins the movement
- Leadership, natively produced by these groups, authentically and powerfully expressing the group needs, and capable of fundamental management tasks, required to turn vision into a strategy
- Executive layer of enthusiasts within the mass, organizing smaller groups and shaping their performance in a way conductive to implementation of the strategy on a tactical, all the way down to personal level
The model is simple, but robust and proven by generations of those who managed to create and shape human nations for thousands of years - one inclined to library studies could find plenty of examples to back it, and illustrate these concepts with history snippets.
The only difference is that nowadays, given the powerful totalitarian social monitoring and control systems, emphasis would shift from traditional "hub and spoke" to ideology-driven "networking" social organization and action models.
Which is not a bad thing, but most importantly, it is imperative that disorganized rebellion would grow into shape by getting focused on a meaningful application of power - otherwise its effort would become vapor once and again... until the pot runs out of water and melts down with no hope, nor purpose.
Since Trump surrender, all the yells are quiet, and all the panic turned apathy. This is normal, this is how every rebellion lacking ideology ends up - people raise to express their disappointment, but as this move is spontaneous and not organized, emotions blow the lid and turn into vapor. Then the pot keeps boiling until the next opportunity makes suffering unbearable, bringing people to the streets.
Now, how could these series of protests be shaped in a meaningful, organized movement, pursuing and achieving political goals - ultimate one of these being taking power and driving a nation in a direction matching the will of those strong enough to express it?
Well, first of all, a nation is needed. Not just a territory, not a pile of paperwork with some logos - a nation as a cultural phenomenon, uniting people by defined rejection and acceptance.
For example, those who disagree with elections steal may deny the usurper, and accept the democratic system as the only way of choosing the personalities directing governing efforts of their nation.
Or, large groups of people could strongly disagree with dilution of their culture by masses of incompatible ones, and accept exclusively the values of their native - or adopted - culture.
Or, considerable sized crowd could want to express its rejection of the globalist world model - with its corporate-driven economic clusters, and agglomerations of fully enslaved sheep - and embrace a traditional model of nation-based world division, all the way down to states and families, with independent and free individuals at the core.
The basics required to turn such combos of rejection and acceptance into actionable core values, are simple:
1. Clear, explicit, and widely distributed foundational statements shaping the group. "We deny this, this and that. We want such, such and such". That must be printed on leaflets, written on the walls, carried on the banners during the civil unrest
2. Groups of people openly accepting these statements, and assuming a naturally born, popular name - bearing consequences of being singled out as a group member by potentially violent and aggressive adversaries
3. Territories where these groups could assemble, join resources, and organize for action - that implying definitive sacrifice of the current lifestyle towards desired one, for each group member who joins the movement
4. Leadership, natively produced by these groups, authentically and powerfully expressing the group needs, and capable of fundamental management tasks, required to turn vision into a strategy
5. Executive layer of enthusiasts within the mass, organizing smaller groups and shaping their performance in a way conductive to implementation of the strategy on a tactical, all the way down to personal level
The model is simple, but robust and proven by generations of those who managed to create and shape human nations for thousands of years - one inclined to library studies could find plenty of examples to back it, and illustrate these concepts with history snippets.
The only difference is that nowadays, given the powerful totalitarian social monitoring and control systems, emphasis would shift from traditional "hub and spoke" to ideology-driven "networking" social organization and action models.
Which is not a bad thing, but most importantly, it is imperative that disorganized rebellion would grow into shape by getting focused on a meaningful application of power - otherwise its effort would become vapor once and again... until the pot runs out of water and melts down with no hope, nor purpose.
(post is archived)