Hold Until Relieved

[The Good Reverend Roger]

One of the phrases that sure to inspire terror and dread in a soldier is "hold until relieved".  Anyone who's been around the block knows what that really means; "no relief force is coming", or in infantry jargon/gallows humor, "DIP" (die in place).  It is an order given to buy time to cover a retreat, or allow other forces to reorganize.  If it meant anything else, more complicated orders would have been issued.

At that point, it's a pretty sure bet that the term "fighting position" (once known as "fox holes") is now, or very shortly, interpreted as "unmarked grave".  Given the sheer number of wars in the world's history, there are many such graves all over the world.

But now we are told by our Captains of Industry, our bankers, our pundits, and our government to hold until relieved, that a relief force will be along shortly.  But grunts know.  Grunts are used to the shitty end of the stick, and are not fooled by such empty promises...And when I say "grunt", I do not only mean infantrymen.  Civil rights leaders in the 60s were told to wait...To be patient, that things would change if only people like Martin Luther King and Medgar Evers would hold until relieved.

Fortunately, the civil rights leaders were not so foolish as to believe any of that rot, and went and fixed things themselves, forcing the government and the rest of the establishment to join the parade.  Luckily for them, they had good leadership.

Now, groups like Occupy and the Tea Party are told to hold until relieved.  The Tea Party believes, and they expect that everything in their life will change if the GOP regains the executive branch.  It will change, of course, but not in the way they are thinking.  Occupy, on the other hand, knows the promise of relief to be bullshit, but lacks the leadership necessary to effect any sort of actual change. 

The only difference is, Occupy knows there is no relief column coming, while the Tea Party is certain that one will be here in November.  Their fates, of course, are the same, but the Occupy people at least have the grim satisfaction of knowing that they know the truth.  It's cold comfort, but it's better than nothing.

The critical flaw in the analogy is that a soldier is normally – thought not always - told to hold until relieved to accomplish some purpose.  Today, we are told to hold until relieved so that the people issuing the orders may finish robbing us.  This leaves us with two choices...A) bravely man our positions, or B) do the "bug out boogie" (ie, fuck the officers, get the hell out).

In terms of the current conflict (the rather one-sided class warfare being waged on the public), "bugging out" can mean many things.  It can mean organized boycotts of loans, or of businesses, etc.  It can mean far grimmer things, of course, but that is a battle lost before it even begins...While stringing up a banker or two may sound like a satisfying pastime, it causes no end of paperwork, not to mention giving the oligarchs the excuse they need to crack down hard, as well as rallying the dumbfucks to their side.  No, better to hit them in a way they to which they cannot really respond.  As ECH said, "if you owe the bank $10K, that's your problem.  If you owe the bank $100 million, that's their problem.

That's a mighty big stick, and there's more than one way to swing it.  The ways I've mentioned are fairly predictable, and are probably planned for...But there must be some way to exploit that gigantic flaw in the system.

We just have to figure out how.

Or Kill Me.

[LMNO]

If they ask for it in triplicate, send it in quintuplet.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

mass synchronized bankruptcy?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

mass synchronized bankruptcy?

Someone brought that up before.

You wouldn't even need bankruptcy.  All it would take would be for a large number of people to miss a single payment all at once.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

Is there a ballpark figure on how many people it would take?

Has anything like this ever been done before that would suggest what the banks' likely response would be?

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Is there a ballpark figure on how many people it would take?

Has anything like this ever been done before that would suggest what the banks' likely response would be?

If it was done right, their likely response would be to collapse.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Is there a ballpark figure on how many people it would take?

Has anything like this ever been done before that would suggest what the banks' likely response would be?

Naw, we'd have to dig for that number.

Again, I'd like to stress that this wasn't my idea.  It might have been yours or Nigel's, I can't remember, to be honest.

And what could the bank's response be?  Loans are contracts.  There are specific penalties for missing a given number of payments.  A single month wouldn't be a giant penalty...At least it isn't for me.

Also, missing a payment isn't a criminal act, so I'd gather that there wouldn't be any conspiracy issues.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Is there a ballpark figure on how many people it would take?

Has anything like this ever been done before that would suggest what the banks' likely response would be?

If it was done right, their likely response would be to collapse.

You don't want that.  The banking system is necessary, it just needs to be brought back to reality.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Is there a ballpark figure on how many people it would take?

Has anything like this ever been done before that would suggest what the banks' likely response would be?

Naw, we'd have to dig for that number.

Again, I'd like to stress that this wasn't my idea.  It might have been yours or Nigel's, I can't remember, to be honest.

And what could the bank's response be?  Loans are contracts.  There are specific penalties for missing a given number of payments.  A single month wouldn't be a giant penalty...At least it isn't for me.

Also, missing a payment isn't a criminal act, so I'd gather that there wouldn't be any conspiracy issues.

It was Nigel's idea, and it is fucking brilliant.
I think the sticking point is getting enough people to actually do it.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Is there a ballpark figure on how many people it would take?

Has anything like this ever been done before that would suggest what the banks' likely response would be?

Naw, we'd have to dig for that number.

Again, I'd like to stress that this wasn't my idea.  It might have been yours or Nigel's, I can't remember, to be honest.

And what could the bank's response be?  Loans are contracts.  There are specific penalties for missing a given number of payments.  A single month wouldn't be a giant penalty...At least it isn't for me.

Also, missing a payment isn't a criminal act, so I'd gather that there wouldn't be any conspiracy issues.

It was Nigel's idea, and it is fucking brilliant.
I think the sticking point is getting enough people to actually do it.

Even if you could get enough people to do it, how do you coordinate it without going viral and giving the banks plenty of time to prepare?

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

Is there a ballpark figure on how many people it would take?

Has anything like this ever been done before that would suggest what the banks' likely response would be?

Naw, we'd have to dig for that number.

Again, I'd like to stress that this wasn't my idea.  It might have been yours or Nigel's, I can't remember, to be honest.

And what could the bank's response be?  Loans are contracts.  There are specific penalties for missing a given number of payments.  A single month wouldn't be a giant penalty...At least it isn't for me.

Also, missing a payment isn't a criminal act, so I'd gather that there wouldn't be any conspiracy issues.

It was Nigel's idea, and it is fucking brilliant.
I think the sticking point is getting enough people to actually do it.

Even if you could get enough people to do it, how do you coordinate it without going viral and giving the banks plenty of time to prepare?

Do things "go viral" slowly enough that people can prepare?

I'm sure they've heard this kind of talk before, the problem is that I don't think they have the foggiest idea of how likely that sort of confluence actually is. So, I'd imagine they already have contingency plans and that forcing their hand sooner, while there's still a some heat on them, is better than later, as the US public has the attention span of a gnat.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

a "hey guys lets all do this to show those bastards!" campaign wouldn't work. nobody is going to risk their own credit score or whatever just to get back at banks, when the idea seems unlikely to work anyway. so it would need an element of the "book burning party" approach. get people to ACCIDENTALLY fight for the right cause. maybe create a gigantic scare that hackers can get your personal information via bank transfer information and the only way to stay safe is to halt all payments to large companies for 30 days.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

a "hey guys lets all do this to show those bastards!" campaign wouldn't work. nobody is going to risk their own credit score or whatever just to get back at banks, when the idea seems unlikely to work anyway. so it would need an element of the "book burning party" approach. get people to ACCIDENTALLY fight for the right cause. maybe create a gigantic scare that hackers can get your personal information via bank transfer information and the only way to stay safe is to halt all payments to large companies for 30 days.

Now you're talking.  Something like that.

Best to make sure whatever it is is 169% legal though, if you're going to poke the penguin.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

a "hey guys lets all do this to show those bastards!" campaign wouldn't work. nobody is going to risk their own credit score or whatever just to get back at banks, when the idea seems unlikely to work anyway. so it would need an element of the "book burning party" approach. get people to ACCIDENTALLY fight for the right cause. maybe create a gigantic scare that hackers can get your personal information via bank transfer information and the only way to stay safe is to halt all payments to large companies for 30 days.

Now you're talking.  Something like that.

Best to make sure whatever it is is 169% legal though, if you're going to poke the penguin.

"War of the Worlds" was legal. We need something like that.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

a "hey guys lets all do this to show those bastards!" campaign wouldn't work. nobody is going to risk their own credit score or whatever just to get back at banks, when the idea seems unlikely to work anyway. so it would need an element of the "book burning party" approach. get people to ACCIDENTALLY fight for the right cause. maybe create a gigantic scare that hackers can get your personal information via bank transfer information and the only way to stay safe is to halt all payments to large companies for 30 days.

Now you're talking.  Something like that.

Best to make sure whatever it is is 169% legal though, if you're going to poke the penguin.

"War of the Worlds" was legal. We need something like that.

I think they "fixed" that, not long afterward.

That would be a great idea if turns out to be legal. Also, I don't think anyone was suggesting a "hey guys let's get the bastards" as a campaign angle, buttflaps.