Is revolution, as we historically know it, now impossible?

When the people are starving, anything can happen.

Asymmetrical warfare has proven highly effective, also.

We have the Rojova revolution going on right now. Various people are coming up with ideas to overthrow governments. Enough people, enough anger and it'll happen.

Governments should be scared of their people. They fucking are.

>>1521835
once you get a few generations deep of serving military personal relativistically more greatly benefiting from the scarcity surplus of their group collective activities they will eventually naturally as human nature do turn to enlightenment of their actions, leading to collectivist militeristic revolts from the top. military men wont shoot their own civilians. thats what criminals do. look at turkey for example. that is the seed of the next epoch of coupdetats

>>1521835
The reason revolutions don't happen today is because everyone is just LARPing.

Hell, even back in the French Revolution there was a little LARPing, just not as much as there is today.

>>1521850
True, I suppose "sympathetic military" should have been tacked on to the end of the original post as well. However, it may be naive to assume a sympathetic military in all cases, especially considering Turkey's history with coups and its military.

>>1521868
no newfag, not sympathetic military, to their own cause maybe.

homo oeconomis

revolutions only happen by 2 ways:
mass hunger
some hidden interest group, which mostly takes oportunity if there is hunger

revolutions for freedom and shit has depicted nowadays never existed

File: BerlinWall-BrandenburgGate.jpg (3MB, 1119x1663px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1119x1663px

>>1521835
a revolution happend in Germany only 25 years ago

>>1521835
>Does the modern revolution hinge on a decayed or ill-equipped regime
They always have.

>>1521835
As long as people have food, water, shelter and live a life of relative comfort and ease, there will be no revolutions against modern first-world governments.

File: 1466207895394.jpg (67KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 540x540px

>>1521835
Guerrilla warfare
Civil Disobedience
Sub-machine guns is plenty to take out the government
Win over friends/family in the military/national guard/police to your side

Revolution will never be impossible. Leaders are either forced to kill their own people or acquiesce. If they are forced to kill their own people, then the revolution has already become successful.

P.S. Gun control of any form is both unconstitutional, anti-American and adversarial to liberty.

>>1522053
What hunger was there in the American revolution?

>>1523284
Not true. Revolutions most often are not mass movements of the people. Five men wrote the US Constitution.

File: 1322798589001.jpg (41KB, 384x395px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 384x395px

>>1523295
Americans are always hungry. That's why they're all fat; they don't know when to stop.

>>1521835
nah, revolution still happens, hell Ukraine fell to a revolution just 2 years ago.

there's also Egypt, Tunisia, East Timor, South Sudan, plenty of nations have switched governments or claimed independence through a revolutionary war/movement.

Reason why they don't happen much in the Western World is because society was changed through revolution. the Ideas of the French Revolution and the revolutions of 1848 brought about major reform for European nations to address the concerns of their populace, which over time resulted in the comfortable lifestyles where bread/shelter/other necessities are relatively easy to come by.

Every government knows by now that if you can't feed/shelter the people, the chances for revolution skyrocket, so any nation that is capable will make damn sure that there is food on people's tables at the end of the day.

File: ukrainian pyromancer.png (650KB, 699x433px) Image search: [Google]

650KB, 699x433px

>>1521835
What about that revolution in the Ukraine that happened just a few years back? It was very popular at the time as I remember it.

>>1521835
>Is revolution even possible in the modern state?
Revoltuion is never possible, or conversely it's always going on somewhere. They immediately collapse into "civil wars" or sporadic unrest inside a strange ideological regime

>>1523300
The American revolution was mostly a reaction by the Colonials to the expansion of Parliamentary authority. It only acquired a Republican bent when the Colonials (who argued that their charters were issued by the crown and not Parliament) realized that King George was not going to intervene on their behalf.
The Constitution was not envisioned during the Revolutionary War, nor in the time immediately before the Convention of 1787.

>>1523399
My point was that the revolution was not of the many but of the few and those few were not hungry.

>>1522191
Not really a revolution, the DDR literally allowed people to leave

>>1521835
"Ground Up" successful revolutions are a meme.

Almost all successful revolutions in history involved almost every member of society. This includes portions of the fucking army. LE ARMED CITIZEN OVERTHROWING TYRANNY is plain romanticism.

>>1523320
kek

>>1521835
Who says the entire military would remain loyal to the government over the people?

Generally though fully formed armed revolutions are a pretty bad idea when not absolutely necessary, because its sure to get worse before it gets better.

>>1521835
>Is revolution even possible in the modern state?

yes. just look at ukraine. the president might have a few snipers on a roof somewhere picking off the first few dissidents but eventually the soldiers would come to the conclusion that they'd rather defect than slaughter the entire populace of their own country (and even if they did slaughter the whole populace they'd have no people to govern over)

but if you're talking about the average working man displacing all politicians and the rich industrial leaders, well that has never happened and is never going to happen. from a governance standpoint, a revolution is like throwing a rock in a pond; all the surrounding water is immediately going to rush to it's place. to govern you need those politicans and industrial leaders so when opposing any modern government we'd first need to think up a system that would work better in it's place

>>1523295
>calling it a revolution
Ease up on the burgers there, one might think you're actually hungry.

File: lol.jpg (55KB, 479x361px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 479x361px

>>1521850
>military men wont shoot their own civilians
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocidehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror

>>1523295
Not hunger, but an upperclass who realized that they could make more money if they weren't subject to mercantilism.

>>1523292
>Win over friends/family in the military/national guard/police to your side
In a world where "3%ers" wear "thin blue line" t-shirts and anti-police protesters beg for more government intervention, that just won't happen.

>>1521850
>>1524256
It's dumb to treat one case or the other as universal, when sometimes militaries side with the government, sometimes they don't, and sometimes they're split in two.

The biggest barrier to revolution in a modern country in this day and age is not a disparity in firepower. Firstly, you're very unlikely to see revolution where people have a good enough quality of life; they have too much to lose.

But the other barrier is the ability of the state to control and influence information, and gather intelligence. It has never been easier to intercept information; our whole lives revolve around networked devices. And there's nothing to stop antagonists from crushing their neck while weightlifting, shooting themselves, getting hit by a car, or dying some other kind of unfortunate and tragic accidental death if they get uppity.

File: Turk.jpg (98KB, 960x626px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 960x626px

>>1521835
>Is revolution even possible in the modern state? Previously, great powers (France, Russia, Germany) could fall to revolution, but it seems impossible with the current armament gap between the general population and modern military technology.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

>/his/ is so ignorant they do not know about events happening in the world currently.

kys.

>>1524604
The biggest barrier is that most of the states that matter provide good enough public services that a revolution isn't in the public's interest.

Shithole countries still have them all the time.

>>1521838
White people are too cowardly and squeamish to wage an effective guerrilla war because they've been taught that "terrorism" is the most unforgivable sin. Even when they start starving, they'll eat grass like North Koreans before trying to overthrow the state. Americans included.

>>1523419
Actually policies like the Stamp Act, the "Intolerable Acts" and prohibiting westward expansion were all most harmful to the American lower classes. The American Revolution was very cross-class which is one of the reasons why it is one of the rare revolutions in history that did not immediately fall to guillotines and civil wars.

>tfw Venezuela is close to a "revolution" if the current president doesnt leave.
like 1st anon said "When the people are starving, anything can happen".

>>1524615
>Turkshit anything
>Modern

>>1521835
You DO realize that in any revolution,military forces are going to split into factions, right?

The US armed forces are particularly bad about this, the vast majority of military personnel i've met firmly hate every aspect of government that isn't the military, and openly support the idea of revolution and civilians being armed for this purpose.

>>1524285
This is the same world that has the oathkeepers, anon.