I do wonder… Even if CBDCs are rolled out, and the state goes into full “empire strikes back” mode, how many policemen, military men, and National guardsmen would follow orders to seize people’s assets at gun point?
Most men in uniform are good people who want the best for their fellow countrymen. There is a limit to what orders they would be willing to follow. What is that limit?
#[0]
I suspect you don't want to find out. They are trained to take orders and follow chain of command. Look at soldiers from every awful regime throughout history. No reason to presume US soldiers would be different IMO.
And while I do think some would push back they would be overwhelmed by those that toed the line and followed orders.
💯
There is no limit anymore.
The plandemic was a testrun for compliance, you have seen how they acted because of a mild flu, now imagine a fake "life threat".
I recommend you to read about the Milgram experiment. If you push a subject just a tiny bit further everytime, they end up where they would've nether gone in the first place.
Don't underestimate those who control the executive forces.
Germany in the 30s and 40s was full of good people too. They did follow orders though.
won’t happen unless the victims are sufficiently scapegoated
COVID mandates, lockdowns, firings etc showed us all we need to know about what the police/forces will do.
Men who fell asleep during their watch, were brought behind their lines and shot by fellow soldiers, at the command of their officers. There are no limits.
Check out: Milgram Experiment ☝️
Order followers did most the most horrible things in history.
I think you Americans have this idealized concept of "the good men in uniform". I am not American but I do spend lots of time there, it's my second home currently. And I have ZERO doubts that compliance would be probably not absolute, but in practical terms, overwhelming.
I hear you. Still, most Americans grow up loving life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It’s instilled in us at a young age. Sure, they may follow obscene orders if they feel it is indirectly fulfilling that end, in the case of a foreign war for example. But going against one’s fellow citizens is quite another matter. I know some good men in uniform who certainly would not follow such orders. The question is how many would resist, and at what point
#[3]
I hear you and I too want to believe that the good in us would prevail if we were presented with those options. I’m afraid history has shown us otherwise.
I agree with you Alan,
In my small town, my sons raised hell racing their cars around, and they’ve become friends with most of the police force over coffees at the local 24h gas station. I can say with certainty that the local police where I live would throw away their badges if that came to pass. I have even heard several of them say this out loud.
I don’t doubt a sizeable percentage would comply, but areas with high levels of gun ownership and concealed carry permit holders would rebuke such an advance.
How do you mean? They CURRENTLY enforce thousands of laws and regulations that infringe on the rights, property and even the physical integrity of US citizens. They will literally murder you for your taxes, for your guns, or for selling cigarettes without a license.
Sometimes even when there are doubts about the very constitutionality of those laws and regulations -- not that anything the SCOTUS says carries any weight anymore anyway...
But even if you adhere to the definition of "constitutional" as "SCOTUS says so". All it will take is SCOTUS (i.e., the Government) to say so.
My fear is that they will not need to police anyone. They will just contain the flow of their tokens between entities that have a "registered" economic relationship. For example, you get paid for your job in CBDC by your official employer. You can spend your CBDC to buy stuff from registered vendors etc. They will most likely restrict all flow between friends/family members etc. If there is pushback, they might allow some form of donation/gift to people you have a close, "registered", relationship with. Any other money transfers will not be allowed, with the reasoning that they automatically have to be linked to illicit activities. - "How am I supposed to sell my old shoes to someone?", you might ask. - "You cant directly. Sell it to a business that buys (and recycles) old clothing" , they will reply....
There is a limit.
However, governments have applied a filtering process since 2020 to weed out as many non-conformists among military, law-enforcement and critical infrastructure,as possible.
This was likely one of the reasons why the pressure on the unvaccinated was so tough in many professions: to get rid of the ethical individuals that have an inner moral compass.
Still, a society is founded on perceptions and perceptions can shift. This is where government control of media comes in.
The greatest danger to any government is a negative shift in the perception of government authority. If that perception goes bad enough you have a Ceaucescu moment when the military turns on the tyrants. This is typically preceded by excessive government violence against innocent citizens. This is why governments fear escalated demonstrations; it forces them to reveal their authoritarian hand.
If public perception didn't matter then governments wouldn't be hell-bent on controlling all the top priority narratives. Freedom wins eventually but is always preceeded by government overreach.
