Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Could the culture war become civil war?

  1. Aug 5, 2005 #1


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Ignorance only seems to be bliss, and it has been used throughout history to control the masses, particularly by organized religion. The thread on Bush endorsing ID is just one of many examples of how he and his cohorts have been working against science (e.g., stem cell research, global warming, etc.) and to misinform the citizenry via media manipulation and propaganda.

    Let's just hope there will be enough people who will come to the realization of who Bush is, what he represents, along with the corruption and undermining of democracy in our country, and also feel insulted (if not embarrassed), and maybe even outraged.
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 5, 2005 #2
    SOS, I completely agree with what you are saying. How do we change a system which is so corrupted by those in power. We as individuals play for smaller machines that play for the bigger machines. To withdraw from the system is to withdraw from our roles, which will affect our livelihoods. It tends to be a never ending cycle that is unbreakable, and the government strategists know this. It seems as if the damned if you do and damned if you don't scenerio is ever sitting on my lap.
  4. Aug 5, 2005 #3
    The answer's simple, just get a sizable number of people to refuse to pay taxes.
  5. Aug 5, 2005 #4


    User Avatar

    And get arrested :biggrin:
  6. Aug 5, 2005 #5
    What if the sizeable number of individuals involved the police / authorities?
  7. Aug 5, 2005 #6
    There are many people who have been apathetic, but are becoming more aware and involved, as illustrated by the increase in voter turn out in 2004. The problem of propaganda remains, however. Grass roots movements can do wonders. If people can keep the pressure on the media, etc. so our country can refocus on real and important issues, hopefully the poor performance (even unethical behavior) of various incumbents will become glaringly obvious.
  8. Aug 6, 2005 #7


    User Avatar

    That's a case to call it 'civil war'.
  9. Aug 6, 2005 #8
    Ironic that this is how the USA got started, isn't it?
  10. Aug 6, 2005 #9


    User Avatar

    To avoid havoc? You can bet the US will do almost anything to stymie large protest activities.
  11. Aug 6, 2005 #10
    They can't arrest everyone. Besides it's not a huge offence in Canada, I immagine you Yanks would have a tougher time though.
    No, that just means the Authorities will refuse to pay taxes and refuse to arrest people who don't pay taxes either. The Government is subject to the PEOPLE, not the other way around. It's only a civil war if people start an armed rebellion and the military is used.
    Exactly the point.
  12. Aug 6, 2005 #11


    User Avatar

    But doesn't taxes constitute a vital part in Canada's GDP?

    Personally it would be a negative augury. Moreover if authorities initiate to participate in protests, and given the government ignores it, these protests have the potential to escalate into a civil war.
  13. Aug 6, 2005 #12
    Taxes constitute a vital part of any countries GDP, that's why it's such a powerfull protest tool.
    1. The government won't ignore it.

    2. If the government ignores it then... you no longer have to pay taxes.... you win! and if you still want to protest you can find another way to do it. Just keep adding on pressure after pressure untill the Government; a) ceases to exist, or more likely b) responds to your protests.

    3. Why would it escalate into civil war? Organized tax evasion is still a long way from organized rebellion.
  14. Aug 6, 2005 #13


    User Avatar

    Precisely why I find it peculiar for Canadians not to consider it as a considerable major offense.

    One does incline to this view, partially I do too, but what happens when it's counter-productive? Doesn't the potentional for a civil war remain well bred?

    What I meant is if the government remains adamant and persists on demanding these taxes to be paid.

    Merely because authorities are involved. It may be an insatisfactory response but in my view, if a country is devoid of authorities to calm tumultuous protests, and once again given the government ignores it and perpetuates to demand payments, this can only culminate in ramifications, thus an inevitable civil war.
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2005
  15. Aug 6, 2005 #14
    I think you'll find as a general trend that Canada isn't anywhere near as policed as the states, we are very lax by comparison in all our laws.

    How does it become counter-productive? Give me an example.
    I don't understand what you mean about civil war, how is this going to encourage civil war at all, let alone to a significant degree?
    They already insist on having taxes paid, the question is one of enforcment, which is why you need a large number of people to do it, they can't enforce it everywhere forever. So they must either start killing people or give in to the people's demand.

    Look at this scenario: 100,000 people in Washington refuse to pay any taxes at all. A spokes person comes forward and makes some demands before they will resume paying taxes. The next day 10,000 more people refuse to pay taxes. The federal government orders the arrest of the people organizing it. The Police refuse. Every day more people refuse to pay taxes.

    Life continues, people go to work, people have babies and buy food. Only the government is cut out of the loop. What are they going to do? If a civil war starts it will be because the government tries to get the military to force them to stop, and that wouldn't work even in the USA, especially if the movement has that much support.

    Also, there's a big difference between 'civil war' and a little bit of unrest with a few riots. BIG difference.
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2005
  16. Aug 6, 2005 #15
    Why do you talk of 'what if' scenarios when you have England itself as a good example?

    You do remember Maggie Thatcher and the Poll tax don't you?

    So many people didn't pay the taxes that the judicial system couldn't cope.

    Eventually, the government was toppled.

    Since then, there hasn't even been a hint of a return to government in the UK for the Conservative party ... even with Tony running around in Iraq.
  17. Aug 6, 2005 #16
    We should topple the liberal party. Maybe then they won't come back :rolleyes: .
  18. Aug 6, 2005 #17


    User Avatar

    Counter-productive in the sense of not heeding to the warnings and protests. Counter-productive in not ignoring but instead ignoring and demanding payments. How is a nation going to overthrow a government when the administration of this same government clashes against people's perceptions and remains defiant? I believe the nation is resorted to manifest its perceptions in a forceful manner.

    If protests are patchy in the country, the accumulation of people attempting to negate government's arrests are not sufficient. The proportion needs to be bigger. If the government demands you to pay taxes and you fail to do so, the government can liquidate your business, legally remove items from your house or in the worst case scenario put you under arrest. Now in terms of protests, the size of people refusing to pay is what determines the government's actions towards tax avoidances. The latter is what leads me to believe that in order to negate government actions, a colossal size of people are required to create a civil war, granted that the government remains defiant in demanding tax payments, in order to overthrow its administration.

    For a government to withdraw taxes is highly unrealistic, even with protests being present in the country. Scraping taxes would never, as far I speculate, occur. A possible remedy is to lower taxes but never scraping them.

    Therefore for citizens of a nation to completely demand a tax scrap, a civil war, once again given the government remains adamant, is the only solution.
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2005
  19. Aug 6, 2005 #18


    User Avatar

    It toppled without a civil war. The government accepted defeat.
  20. Aug 6, 2005 #19
    Why? What liberal government would resort to force to stop protesters? What population of a (formerly) liberal nation would allow it?
    DM, you're not going to be able to put the government in a position where they can't respond. The idea is to put pressure on the government to realise that they can't maintain control of the country with their current course and thus, you force them to change.

    What exactly are you on about with 'demanding tax payments' they can demand all they want, it's expected. The whole point is that you refuse to do that in order to put pressure on the government. I don't understand the rest of this part.
    What's this about withdrawing taxes? You start paying taxes again once the government gives in to your demands.
  21. Aug 6, 2005 #20
    ..Yeah! That's the goal. Mission accomplished.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Could the culture war become civil war?
  1. Israeli Civil War? (Replies: 23)

  2. Iraq is a Civil War (Replies: 52)

  3. Civil war in Iraq (Replies: 17)