But the problem with this:  let's say you're working at a fast food restaurant and you show up almost everyday for two years and you work harder than anyone else there, but that doesn't really matter to the supervisors.  Then you see them promoting their own family members etc, at the restaurant instead of more deserving people, how are you going to have a chance to change things from the inside?

report him to someone higher,get a different job?

are you saying you should shoot him or something?

... and this is the core problem with arguing with teenagers and university students. These individuals have very strong opinions which are based on their emotional reacton to how they believe the world works, yet they do not have the experience or understanding of how the world really operates. A more mature adult who has worked towards building a career for several years is fully aware that if they're not respected and their contribution is not valued they have the option to find another job and work for a company where they will be appreciated.

As people get older and see the relationship between their and other people's actions and the consequences from them, which is why people tend to stop seeing people as hapless victims of an unfair society by the time they're in their 30s. This isn't to say that people (necessarily) abandon the desire to want to help people, but most people become aware that the only person standing in the way of unsuccessful people is the unsuccessful people themselves.

Honestly, I don't think a second Civil War is coming. The overwhelming majority of people who join up with these things are chickenhawks: they talk a good game, and they even mostly know how to dress the part, but they'd wet their pants and run home to mommy if anyone ever actually pointed a gun at them.

This is not to say that they are not a threat, just that they are of a different kind. Oklahoma City showed us what happened when a couple of these kooks actually manage to work themselves up into a state that they do something other than playing in the woods. But not enough of them are capable of actually doing this that any actual conflict could be called a war: "execution for treason" would be a better term, and the militiamen would be squarely on the wrong side of it. They will never rise beyond the level of small terrorist groups, because to be frank, they don't have the guts.

May I quote this for my sig?

sure

Mmmm thats why I dont like old guys ways of thinking.