
Originally Posted by
josephdc
Struggle through non-violent means.

Originally Posted by
josephdc
But when you said "radical", and that there must be an "overhaul" of things in society, doesn't it mean armed revolution? How can a radical change, an overhaul of things in society happen without violence? Or how can an act be radical and at the same time non-violent?
i will throw back the question to you.

and on top of that is the idea that all along, we have waged fake "revolutions" (EDSA 1,2,3... 10), "non-violent revolutions" though was able to change the person on top
but have emerged to be ineffectual in changing the purtid and filthy bureaucratic system.

Originally Posted by
josephdc
You are hopeful that change can come without violence, but think that we may have to resort to it if the present downward spiral of the country continues...?
exactly.
but it is not that "we will have to resort to violence if the present downward spiral of the country continues"... the fact itself that the elite is
*already* instituting violence in the countrysides by militarization, their private armies, and even using the army and the police to guard the vast haciendas that these elite
(who incidentally are also the ones in power) own.
the elite will do anything it can to protect itself and the position that it already has now even to the point of using the law itself to discredit and ignore the plight of the filipino "masa" that is suffering from this institutionalized poverty.
we must understand that the peaceful mode of radically changing the society is our primary aim. yet bloodshed will be inevitable if the powers that be will not give in to the outry of the majority.
it is time the filipinos woke up from the long disturbing nightmare that he is in... a nightmare that made him believe that he cannot do anything substantial about his own sufferings.