The Revolution of 2030

riot

Image: Mark Graves / The Oregonian / Associated Press

“Hi. I’m Susie; she/her/hers.”

“Stop that! We don’t do that here.”

Susie cringed when the group leader Sharon snapped at her.

“Sorry, I didn’t mean…” Susie felt abruptly crushed but was determined not to shed tears, especially in front of them.

“No, I’m sorry.” Sharon realized she’d been overreacting, though she had good reason. “It’s my fault. I’m just so tired of the tyranny of those words.”

“We’re all feeling worn down by it, Shar.” Francisco chimed in wanting to calm the mood a bit.

There were twelve of them gathered in a small room in the basement of the university’s psychology building. It was nearly midnight, but being a teaching assistant, Francisco’s pass card opened the doors after hours.

They sat down around a makeshift conference table with mismatching chairs. The room was used for storage of excess and well as worn and broken furniture. The dim lighting and deep shadows suited the conspiratorial mood.

“I think you all know why we’re here.” Sharon saw the other eleven solemnly nod their heads. “President Michelle Obama has broken every promise she ever made.”

“That’s right.” It was Rick who spoke up. “She promised to push through term limits for Congress, but instead, she signed an Executive Order to give herself a third term as President.”

“The Thought Police are everywhere,” Abdul added. They’ve disbanded all of the Republican, Libertarian, and other conservative student clubs on campus. Now we have to meet in secret like criminals.”

“According to them, we are criminals. Anyone who doesn’t conform to campus codes of strict progressive thought and speech can be expelled.” Liz shuddered at her own words.

“Worse than that, a bill with those codes is in front of Congress right now. With a Democratic majority, it’s sure to pass, adding to the other ‘progressive enforcement’ rules Obama signed into law. Then it will be illegal not to introduce yourself in public without adding your preferred personal pronouns…”

Sharon interrupted Susie. “…and it will be criminal not to address someone by their preferred pronouns. I mean ‘Ey,’ ‘Ze,’ Hir’? I can’t keep them straight in my head.”

“But when we question the practice to the School’s Dean of Political Correctness or even in an online forum, we get accused of being transphobic and bigots.”

“Francisco, you know no one wants to be disrespectful of someone else, but we’re not given a choice in the matter. Just being rude is serious offense on college campuses today, and by the first of the year, it will be criminal. People could go to jail.”

“We’ve got to stop them, Sharon.” Reed talked for the first time.

“How?” Susie was exasperated. “There’s no way to vote them out of office. The masses aren’t represented anymore, just the urban elites, the ones with all the money.”

“You know why we’re here. It’s a good thing I swept the room for bugs before we all arrived.” Liz was the electronics expert in the cell and she knew that there could be surveillance devices anywhere. “When the political process breaks down, the only alternative we have is revolution.”

“The West Borough cell has been gathering weapons. Not easy since Congress passed the anti-arms law. Now only police and the military can legally possess firearms of any type.” Latesha was the contact between the Campus and West Borough cells. For security, all communication between the two groups went through her.

“Revolution.” Sharon sighed and let the word hang in the air between them all. “It’s time for the common people to push back, the sons and daughters of the rural and suburban class, the children of soldiers when the military served to defend our nation instead of controlling the citizens.

“They’ll never understand.” Francisco put a hand on Sharon’s shoulder. “They really do believe that the right way to live, the only way to live, is in the Progressive Dictatorship. They believe we’re all children and must be controlled, by indoctrination preferably, and by force if necessary.”

Rick slammed his hand down on the table top. “Just this past year, thousands of peaceful protestors were rounded up and put in prison as enemies of progressive thought. My sister was one of them and I don’t know when I’ll get to see her.”

“Never again.” Sharon stood. “We shall overcome.” The rest stood and began to sing the old protest song from the last century. In 2030, it was more relevant than ever.

Less than six months later, the armed insurrection of American Citizen’s movement began with brother against brother and mother against daughter. It would end only when the old order had been removed and tyranny in America was replaced by a government that once again represented all the people of the United States.

I know there are people who will consider me horrible and even a bigot for writing this and suggesting that it’s even possible for liberals and progressives to form a dictatorship forcing their rule on the rest of our nation. However, if Hitler is possible, so is Stalin.

I first got the idea for this wee tale when I read an opinion piece in the New York Times called Pronoun Privilege. While I have no desire to be rude or to hurt someone’s feelings, I think it’s equally wrong for an extreme minority to force their worldview on the majority. Please ask if I’m willing to use a certain pronoun to refer to you, don’t demand, and please don’t demand that I introduce myself with my own preferred pronouns.

Of course, my story isn’t really about pronouns, it’s about the increasing drive of one social and political viewpoint to compel the rest of us to adopt that viewpoint, whether we share it or not.

With Donald Trump being the President-Elect, and a Republican majority in both the House and the Senate, it seems like I’m complaining about nothing, but watching the recent vote recount and all of the angst regarding Clinton winning more of the popular vote but not the electoral college, it seems that viewpoint is still trying to consume us.

A lot of people still don’t understand how someone as crazy and offensive as Trump could win over Clinton. The answer is that there was a conservative “pushback” to what some saw as the coming of progressive totalitarianism. Trump isn’t the President we want or need, but he was the only message the rest of us could send to say “We’ve had enough! It’s time for a change.”

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “The Revolution of 2030

  1. Etiquette used to be the way various societies laid down the law to everyone on just what was polite behavior. If you did not comply, you were uncouth, and to be avoided, but at least few people wanted to put you in jail for wearing the wrong words on your t-shirt or not being sufficiently careful of everyone’s feelings, despite having feelings of one’s own no one was being careful of.

    I do not wish to be deliberately rude to anyone. I dislike confrontation, and avoid it when I can. However, when confrontation is made a daily part of my life by people saying I must do other, extra careful things to keep them safe from my verbage, as well as my opinion…well, it makes me willing to be very confrontative, primarily in words, on the web, and in person.

    I began with a whisper. It sounded like paper going into a ballot box. A lot of people whispered with me. One hopes we do not have to get to the equivalent of shouting.

    Like

  2. I do think this thing you wrote is horrible and that you’re a bigot and slanderous.

    And I don’t think you’ll ever listen to why in the world that might matter.

    Like

    • I was trying to illustrate why conservatives might rise up against an oppressive, totalitarian government trying to make it illegal to disagree with them. Granted, it probably would never get that far, but I think a Trump victory was a mild echo of the sentiment I tried to communicate in this story.

      Like

  3. Blaming a black woman in the context of all this ginned up fear, and naming a specific black woman who hasn’t done these things, yeah, I’d say that captures the sentiment of enthusiastic Trump supporters. And you’ve done this before, used a black woman specifically (a particular real person) while conveying a false fear.

    Maybe you remember me also commenting (as I didn’t neglect to when you used a real person as an icon for a mis-reported story) when you wrote a completely fictional story with no real person. There’s a theme. Maybe you could publish a book of short stories with scary black women. Or make money writing fake news.

    “…if Hitler is possible, so is Stalin.” SO IS TRUMP.

    Oh, the outrage.

    Don’t be watchful of the actual person in office. Just make stuff up.

    You make efforts to tamp down speech and demonstrations with concern about Trump.

    What about HIS call for people to protest when Romney didn’t win? Was he going to pay them? But of course he complains when people protest, people who HE didn’t call on to protest or express disappointment. The hypocrisy is all over the place, and Christians don’t seem to have the discernment or integrity to really care.

    Oh, and one more thing. I don’t go up to people and declare pronouns verbally, but the very fact that I am clearly a woman would mean Trump and people he’s emboldened “get to” call women pigs and so forth, ask how much they weigh, make comments about how desirable it would be to assault them, and on and on.

    Well, actually, another (thing) yet. There’s an ongoing fear stoked of police and other armed forces, on the right. But when “the left” expresses anything along those lines, the right play acts like they have no understanding about such concerns and makes a big show of how anti law enforcement those people are.

    Like

    • Marleen, this isn’t “fake news,” it’s clearly dystopian fiction and presented as such. I did include (or at least alluded to) multiple ethnicities belonging to this particular revolutionary group to bring into question the stereotype that conservatives are always being older, white male sexist, racist bigots. I’m not sure where your “scary black women” comment is coming from.

      As upsetting as Trump may be, I don’t think he can be compared to either Hitler or Stalin unless you actually believe Donald Trump will go down in history as a mass-murder.

      What I meant by the statement was that if a conservative totalitarian regime is possible so is a progressive totalitarian regime. Any social or political system can be taken to an extreme. No extreme is good.

      The other point there, is that even extremist dictators don’t necessarily see themselves and their regimes as bad or evil. They may truly believe it is necessary to limit or eliminate social freedoms including freedom of speech and even freedom of thought for what they consider the greater progressive good. I propose that it’s one thing to propose a social agenda and quite another for force that agenda on others, particularly by force of law and threat of punishment. We’re already seeing that on many University campuses. I just took it a few steps further in my fictional tale.

      Fidel Castro was supposed to revolutionize Cuba and make a government for the people, but instead he took a bad situation and made it much, much worse. That’s what happens when you give anyone, regardless of their politics, unlimited power over a population. Fortunately, although our system is imperfect, it comes with a set of checks and balances so at least in theory, Trump can’t become dictator.

      I don’t know if you’ve read it, but I wrote a “mirror image” story to this one called The Unlikely Alliance that depicts voluntary cooperation and friendship between an older, conservative cisgender white male and a transgender female. I believe it’s possible for very different people to find something in common and act in unity on that platform. My main objection is to force people, by social pressure and particularly by law, to surrender their free will and free speech for the sake of currently popular social viewpoints.

      I think open dialog will effect more long lasting change than holding a virtual gun to someone’s head and telling them they must think, say, and act in a certain manner “or else.” I think that’s what rural voters were trying to say when they voted for Trump. I mentioned in the after notes of this story that Trump was never a desirable President and if anyone better would have been a viable candidate, they probably would have won. However, the disenfranchised and forgotten in America elected Trump, not because he’ll be a good President, but because they were getting sick and tired of being pushed into non-existence by the current administration. Trump was the only way they could send a message anyone would listen to that they’ve had enough and that it’s time for a change.

      I’m sure we’re in for a rocky four years and I hope that in 2020, the Wall Street one percent will decide to bankroll a couple of more credible candidates than those we were presented with in 2016.

      Like

      • Oh wait. I know what you meant by “scary black woman.” You mean me casting Michelle Obama as POTUS. That’s wasn’t a slight against women of color. I just heard somewhere a rumor that Ms. Obama’s name was being considered for the Dem’s run for the White House in 2020 and decided to use it. Really, it was just for name recognition.

        Like

    • I don’t want this to degrade into a Clinton vs. Trump debate (and we’ve had quite a lot of those over the past months). I am not defending Trump. It is true, that I’m relieved Clinton is not the President-Elect because I wasn’t looking forward to another four and probably eight more years of her continuing Barack Obama’s disastrous policies (such as supporting a nuclear Iran and continually throwing Israel under a bus), but Trump isn’t “my guy”. My focus is broader than these two players on the national stage in this story. It’s about a government that, especially for the past eight years, has supported only certain segments of the population largely congregated in urban centers, while alienating and even demonizing over half the American citizens. Those from suburban and rural communities in our nation.

      I was born in Nebraska and so was my Mother. My Dad is from Oklahoma. I have relatives in Omaha still and although I lived in the San Francisco Bay Area and Orange County California for nearly twenty years, I’m now in Idaho. Middle America is tired of being told by urban elites that they’re worthless and their opinions don’t count just because they aren’t young urban elites, or that they/we are automatically racist just because they/we are white. You may not agree with a dairy farmer from Iowa or a rancher from Idaho, but they have as much right to be represented by the government as a mobile apps developer from Palo Alto or a clothing designer in Manhattan.

      Donald Trump probably won’t represent middle America and I’m certain he’ll tax the middle class mercilessly, but he was at least smart enough to visit those rural states and make the people living there feel they were being heard. Clinton, Obama, and the Democratic left couldn’t have cared less about them because they were not moneyed, progressive, or “sophisticated.”

      When I was little, my Grandpa lived was a retired carpenter who lived in a blue collar neighborhood on the “wrong side of the tracks” in Omaha, Nebraska. He may not have been cool and on top of the latest trends, but he was a good man who raised his family as well as he could and who loved me very much.

      People like him today deserve to be represented as much as people from New York, Chicago, and Seattle. What’s wrong with that?

      Like

  4. Most of the articles I linked to weren’t about Clinton at all. Sorry her name was mentioned in the title of the one. The point wasn’t to debate in favor of her. But there was a debate that included her, not that I picked her (to be part of the debates [the nominee for Democrats] or to be President either, as you may recall I have said).

    It seems to me your jumping to all this defensiveness about what kind of person you are and not being elite… well, it’s just sad. I’m sorry if you think being a female means my concerns are all about being elite. Not much I can say to that except too bad for females. Too bad for anyone oppressed who’s not on your list.

    Like

    • The point of my article isn’t to create a government that’s biased one way or the other but to construct the ideal (which we’ll probably never get given human nature); a government representing all the people, not just some. Equal rights for men and women, but also for the different classes.

      Like

  5. Frustrating that apparently all that matters is what you imagine you intended. There is a whole lot of misinformation going on in our world, and it doesn’t help to keep feeding the frenzy. Another specific I don’t think is constructive is to divide up rural and suburban from urban in terms of elites and in terms of the military. For one, there are plenty of people in urban settings who aren’t elite, plenty of people in suburbs or not in the cities generally who are elite, and this guy who is supposedly not of the elite IS elite. It’s such a mind warp. And I have a son in the military. I think it’s important that there be cohesiveness within the ranks all learning Constitutional principles and duties. There are a lot of kids from cities in the military because they’re poor (not elite) but patriotic. Oh, wait…

    I get it.

    City is code for minority. Fear.

    Oh, well. Not much I can say about that either.

    I’ll mention one more thing. But I’ve mentioned it before. And I don’t get at all why fact-based thinking isn’t what counts. It’s very tiring to see the things that are basically accusations as to why one would vote for Trump or not. I never saw anything to make me think he’s more pro-Israel. And why does he get a pass on bringing a pro-Hamas guy and indicating we as Americans want to change in the direction of being pro-Hamas?

    Like

  6. I know he said pandering things about being pro-Israel, like he said there is no one more respectful to women than he is. I think we can absolutely agree there are many people, many men, much more respectful.

    Like

    • Marleen, I never said I was supportive of Trump as President. If someone more viable had been available to vote for that I knew could beat Clinton, then I would have voted for that person. Unfortunately, we the people were all left with no option options.

      Like

  7. Trump, for the final debate, brought along…. a Trump fan, but he is also a supporter of Hamas, which has called for the eradication of Israel, and he has been the target of right-wing writers (long before the Trump campaign) who claim he is somehow connected to the Muslim Brotherhood. Still, Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway happily posed for a photo with Malik….* Trump also …. engineered a pre-debate press conference with Danney Williams, an African American man who claims to be Bill Clinton’s son. (A 1999 DNA test found no link between Clinton and Williams.) Such stunts make for good right-wing tweets and alt-right Reddit posts …
    (They don’t do much to persuade the suburban mom in Columbus, Ohio, to vote for the guy who bragged about grabbing pussy.)
    {Oh, you’d be surprised. Not all moms are the same.}
    ……. a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, noted that Clinton’s top strategists were puzzled by the Trump strategy. “It’s a page out of the Breitbart playbook,” he said. ….What is the intention of that?
    …. He pointed out that Trump was highlighting “accusations and conspiracy theories that I don’t think the average voter is even conversant with.”
    — quote from one of the article links

    The Clinton campaign (as well as the author of the article) might not have understood, but Trump and his campaign did these things on purpose. They got parts of their cobbled electorate in this way.

    * As I’ve said, an official top Trump spokesman (I saw this happen myself; the articles I share are found when I do searches for links to show what I’ve already learned by seeing and so on) said the kind of change Americans want is illustrated by Malik wanting the same kind of change (pro-Hamas, pro-Trump, anti-Obama). {Other famous Trump Republican pushers said things early on — to concerns about Trump not being careful as to offensive statements for Jewish people — things like, “How many f—–g Jews do you think are in this country?”}

    So, we can, in all honesty, dispense with the repeated refrains that people who didn’t vote for Trump are not so pro-Israel as people who did vote for Trump; it is false that there is something to count on.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s