I've been thinking about narratives, de-legitimizing the state and whatnot. Thing is, most people live on stories. I probably do too, but I am a little more ambivalent about stories because I have seen the false sense of security people get. Unfortunately, one cannot merely point out a particular narrative is wrong; generally folks need a new story to replace the old.
So, watching the old Babylon 5 series made me wonder, is it necessary for an unconstitutional government to be challenged by officers of said government? On Babylon 5 they pull off breaking with Earth government, but it seems very much like some particular Roman legion on the fringes of the empire breaking off with Rome. Is this the dominant narrative for internal regime change? Is this why we haven't really seen much in the way of reduction of USG power despite clear incompetence, violations of the Constitution, war, stupidity, etc...?
As much fun as has been tended to be made with third world countries and military juntas- is this the only narrative we have for ending an out of control D.C.?
I guess this isn't totally true- there was Snowcrash, there are bits and pieces of stories libertarians tell themselves, but what about for people still voting right now? What would look plausible to Republicans and Democrats?
Speaking of Babylon 5 and narratives- ye, cats, the propaganda! Servile males, constant banging on the egalitarian drum, being married to a career rather than having a functional human marriage, xenophilia, etc...