Revolution in America

[klamath]

Revolution in America, what would it be like?
I have seen post after post about the glory of the American revolution and how man must fight for his freedom now against the terror of government.

The war Gods turn to us and ask. "Are you sure this is what you want? Do you know what you are asking? When you ask us to judge we will decide and there is no turning back. We have a fee we never waive, and that is blood of the innocent as well as the guilty." They know not what they ask for but so shall it be.

Revolution now would not have the king to rally against. A revolution now would not have the Union to rally against. If a revolution is small it will be crushed by the federal army. If it is large enough to challenge the government it will be many armies and many factions. Once the federal army is weakened the armies will turn against themselves. The Red guards from MA will take on the VT Patriot militia. The LA White knights and the Harlem Black Knights will engage in battle. States against states, groups against groups, individuals against individuals. Not just anarchists and libertarians have their goals for what the new America should look like. There are socialists, communists, Nazi, Zionists American Indians, etc etc that would see it as the opportunity to carve out their long dreamed of utopia. Now let's add in the foreign armies from those counties that don't have their own civil wars. The Chinese announce to the world that in order to stop the bloodshed in America they are deploying the 20 million man peoples army to install order. The Europeans ralley what is left of the UN and deploy a UN army under the same pretext. Will you be more free in the end? The war Gods will decide and you have no choice but bow your head and accept what they rule.

YouTube - The Green Fields Of France (or) Willie McBride-The Dropkick Murphys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UvQ52A7ksM)

[Paulitical Correctness]

+1

The posts romanticizing revolution disturb me.

[klamath]

...and the peaceful liberty movement will be weakened or destroyed by those the condone and advocate violent means. All peaceful liberty lovers will be smeared and weakened by attacks from the left and neocon right because of the actions of a violent few. When will people learn?

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

+1

The posts romanticizing revolution disturb me.

The youth today want to do something to make things right. They want to join gangs so they can steal things for its older members, they want to join the U.S. military to fight Arab terrorism, or they want to join Arab terrorist groups so they can strap bombs to themselves to blow themselves up for a cause. In the end, young men are used by old ones.
But there can be only one revolution towards the Truth and then every other one after that becomes a false movement away from the Truth. What we need in the United States is American movements back towards the Truth. As the Truth is what made us free, there is no defeat in the Truth, all things are equal in the Truth, and nothing but the Truth will make us great.

[Indy Vidual]

revolution in america, what would it be like?
I have seen post after post about the glory of the american revolution and how man must fight for his freedom now against the terror of government.

The war gods turn to us and ask. "are you sure this is what you want? Do you know what you are asking? When you ask us to judge we will decide and there is no turning back. We have a fee we never waive, and that is blood of the innocent as well as the guilty." they know not what they ask for but so shall it be.

Revolution now would not have the king to rally against. A revolution now would not have the union to rally against. If a revolution is small it will be crushed by the federal army. If it is large enough to challenge the government it will be many armies and many factions. Once the federal army is weakened the armies will turn against themselves. The red guards from ma will take on the vt patriot militia. The la white knights and the harlem black knights will engage in battle. States against states, groups against groups, individuals against individuals. Not just anarchists and libertarians have their goals for what the new america should look like. There are socialists, communists, nazi, zionists american indians, etc etc that would see it as the opportunity to carve out their long dreamed of utopia. Now let's add in the foreign armies from those counties that don't have their own civil wars. The chinese announce to the world that in order to stop the bloodshed in america they are deploying the 20 million man peoples army to install order. The europeans ralley what is left of the un and deploy a un army under the same pretext. Will you be more free in the end? The war gods will decide and you have no choice but bow your head and accept what they rule.

youtube - the green fields of france (or) willie mcbride-the dropkick murphys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uvq52a7ksm)


+1

the posts romanticizing revolution disturb me.


...and the peaceful liberty movement will be weakened or destroyed by those the condone and advocate violent means. All peaceful liberty lovers will be smeared and weakened by attacks from the left and neocon right because of the actions of a violent few. When will people learn?

+101

[Travlyr]

+1

The posts romanticizing revolution disturb me.

Why? Revolution is not war. War is from tyrants suppressing resistance.

[Stary Hickory]

+1

The posts romanticizing revolution disturb me.

Exactly they are despearate bloody affairs. It is a last resort of the worst kind, when logic fails and rational discourse is outlawed or avoided. A revolution of the mind is much more peaceful and effective.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

+101

We don't pick up a sword against tyranny; but, we pick it up along side a prostitute who has been ordered to kneel because she has been deemed too old and uncomely to sleep with. In darkness with her, we stand in faith and we walk in faith.

[pcosmar]

Violent few?
To who are you referring?

I know of none that even believe that revolution is possible.
I do however expect increased violence from the government forces and a likely collapse and breakdown of existing structure.

I am coming to believe that the Peaceful Revolution is delusional.
:(

[Slutter McGee]

Why? Revolution is not war. War is from tyrants suppressing resistance.

The constant talk of violent rebellion is ticking me off. Maybe, someday, when all peaceful options have been tried, and they have not, and when government oppression is a LOT worse than it is now, maybe then I will entertain talk of violence. And I am just saying entertain, not agree.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Travlyr]

I am coming to believe that the Peaceful Revolution is delusional.
:(

I think we are winning, and I still hold out for a successful peaceful revolution.

[Mini-Me]

Violent few?
To who are you referring?

I know of none that even believe that revolution is possible.
I do however expect increased violence from the government forces and a likely collapse and breakdown of existing structure.

I am coming to believe that the Peaceful Revolution is delusional.
:(

The way I see it, successful violent revolution would not be possible anyway until enough people desired freedom in the first place. By the time we captured that many hearts and minds, it's unlikely that large-scale violent revolution would even be necessary anyway, unless the federal government lashed out extremely violently in a last-ditch effort to regain control (like the British did). Ultimately, our success/failure will come down to how effective we are at overcoming people's conditioning and rescuing them from the cult of state worship.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

The way I see it, successful violent revolution would not be possible anyway until enough people desired freedom in the first place. By the time we capture that many hearts and minds, it's unlikely that large-scale violent revolution would even be necessary anyway, unless the federal government lashed out extremely violently in a last-ditch effort to regain control.

See, this kind of talk makes sense in only Europe because that primitive place is where the people are still lost. Their poor nations weren't founded on the Truth like the United States. In comparison, we Americans have already arrived at the Truth, being founded by our Founding Fathers. This truth is self evident, beng so clear liguistically that it can't be misconstrued, misunderstood, or misinterpreted by a scheming king, lest he be deemed a tyrant and divorced, just as it is also unalienable in Truth that it reduces beyond our partisan minds to be perceived bipartisanly by the collective soul (Soul).

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

The way I see it, successful violent revolution would not be possible anyway until enough people desired freedom in the first place. By the time we captured that many hearts and minds, it's unlikely that large-scale violent revolution would even be necessary anyway, unless the federal government lashed out extremely violently in a last-ditch effort to regain control (like the British did). Ultimately, our success/failure will come down to how effective we are at overcoming people's conditioning and rescuing them from the cult of state worship.

Narrow your focus by entering through the Truth, the American portal which is self evident and unalienable, weed out all this European nonsense, and then go fishing.

[Mini-Me]

Narrow your focus by entering through the Truth, the American portal which is self evident and unalienable, weed out all this European nonsense, and then go fishing.

I know you're disgruntled that nobody else on Earth - let alone this forum - has adopted your esoteric and bombastic homegrown terminology, but singling me out is kind of silly.

[pcosmar]

Narrow your focus by entering through the Truth, the American portal which is self evident and unalienable, weed out all this European nonsense, and then go fishing.

Gobbledygook
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gobbledygook

[Cowlesy]

The way I see it, successful violent revolution would not be possible anyway until enough people desired freedom in the first place. By the time we captured that many hearts and minds, it's unlikely that large-scale violent revolution would even be necessary anyway, unless the federal government lashed out extremely violently in a last-ditch effort to regain control (like the British did). Ultimately, our success/failure will come down to how effective we are at overcoming people's conditioning and rescuing them from the cult of state worship.


+1

Well said as always!

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

I know you're disgruntled that nobody else on Earth - let alone this forum - has adopted your esoteric and bombastic homegrown terminology, but singling me out is kind of silly.

Petty campaigns are popularity contests. American movements take responsible people. You aren't the first to hate the ideal that tyranny is a thing for which we should be responsible.

(If you desire to use the terminology created by modern speech writers, then go ahead. I prefer terms used by our Founding Fathers and the founders that they appreciated as well.)

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Gobbledygook
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gobbledygook

What is the difference between a civil right and a natural right? Is there even a difference? If you don't know or you don't care, then you shouldn't be judging whether someone knows what they are talking about.

[2young2vote]

Violent revolution should only be used when we reach the levels of Stalinist Russia or 1940s Germany. Until then will should fight with our mind, not with our hands.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Violent revolution should only be used when we reach the levels of Stalinist Russia or 1940s Germany. Until then will should fight with our mind, not with our hands.

The Lord's feet did not follow after His hands, but His healing hands followed after the uncomely feet. Likewise, our swords should follow.

[MelissaCato]

Revolution in America, what would it be like?
I have seen post after post about the glory of the American revolution and how man must fight for his freedom now against the terror of government.

The war Gods turn to us and ask. "Are you sure this is what you want? Do you know what you are asking? When you ask us to judge we will decide and there is no turning back. We have a fee we never waive, and that is blood of the innocent as well as the guilty." They know not what they ask for but so shall it be.

Revolution now would not have the king to rally against. A revolution now would not have the Union to rally against. If a revolution is small it will be crushed by the federal army. If it is large enough to challenge the government it will be many armies and many factions. Once the federal army is weakened the armies will turn against themselves. The Red guards from MA will take on the VT Patriot militia. The LA White knights and the Harlem Black Knights will engage in battle. States against states, groups against groups, individuals against individuals. Not just anarchists and libertarians have their goals for what the new America should look like. There are socialists, communists, Nazi, Zionists American Indians, etc etc that would see it as the opportunity to carve out their long dreamed of utopia. Now let's add in the foreign armies from those counties that don't have their own civil wars. The Chinese announce to the world that in order to stop the bloodshed in America they are deploying the 20 million man peoples army to install order. The Europeans ralley what is left of the UN and deploy a UN army under the same pretext. Will you be more free in the end? The war Gods will decide and you have no choice but bow your head and accept what they rule.

YouTube - The Green Fields Of France (or) Willie McBride-The Dropkick Murphys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UvQ52A7ksM)

Hummm .. wonder why they lumped American Indians with the traitors ? Unless of course who ever wrote it... doen't like our Declaration of Independence candid facts. LOL

And what's up with this ... (The war Gods turn to us and ask. "Are you sure this is what you want? Do you know what you are asking? When you ask us to judge we will decide and there is no turning back. We have a fee we never waive, and that is blood of the innocent as well as the guilty." They know not what they ask for but so shall it be.)

-- sounds peculiar to me. Did Glenn Beck write this ?

[Mini-Me]

Petty campaigns are popularity contests. American movements take responsible people. You aren't the first to hate the ideal that tyranny is a thing for which we should be responsible.
Your non sequiturs seem to know no bounds.



(If you desire to use the terminology created by modern speech writers, then go ahead. I prefer terms used by our Founding Fathers and the founders that they appreciated as well.)

Come on, get over yourself. You put on more airs than perhaps every smug aristocrat in the history of Europe combined. You've borrowed a few formal terms occasionally used by Enlightenment thinkers in formal documents, melded them with your own contrivances and petty remarks about Europeans, and transformed the synthesis into an entire dialect of speaking...which you seem to use everywhere. Dan Berkeley called it "management speak." He was correct in the sense that it's overinflated, convoluted, and entirely bereft of non-trivial meaning that's new to anyone here, but the pomp and grandiosity you use to feign philosophical superiority puts your jargon in an entirely new league of "profundus maximus." (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/profundusmaximus.htm)

[Cowlesy]

Your non sequiturs seem to know no bounds.



Come on, get over yourself. You put on more airs than perhaps every smug aristocrat in the history of Europe combined. You've borrowed a few formal terms occasionally used by Enlightenment thinkers in formal documents, melded them with your own contrivances and petty remarks about Europeans, and transformed the synthesis into an entire dialect of speaking...which you seem to use everywhere. Dan Berkeley called it "management speak." He was correct in the sense that it's overinflated, convoluted, and entirely bereft of non-trivial meaning that's new to anyone here, but the pomp and grandiosity you use to feign philosophical superiority puts your jargon in an entirely new league of "profundus maximus." (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/profundusmaximus.htm)

Perhaps that is UEW's Civil Purpose.

[klamath]

Hummm .. wonder why they lumped American Indians with the traitors ? Unless of course who ever wrote it... doen't like our Declaration of Independence candid facts. LOL

And what's up with this ... (The war Gods turn to us and ask. "Are you sure this is what you want? Do you know what you are asking? When you ask us to judge we will decide and there is no turning back. We have a fee we never waive, and that is blood of the innocent as well as the guilty." They know not what they ask for but so shall it be.)

-- sounds peculiar to me. Did Glenn Beck write this ?

You miss the point. That line is only to show the different opinions of what people hold as just and rightous. It does not endorce or condeme only shows that these are some of the ideologies that will turn against each other when widescale violence overtakes America.

[MelissaCato]

OK.

[tmosley]

If it reaches the point where it is like 1940's Germany or Russia, then we've already lost, because we've been disarmed.

Private ownership of guns, and the ready availability of ammunition are the thin, clearly defined line between an overbearing government and a tyrannical one. So long as that line is not crossed, I won't be turning to violence. Once it is, however...

[Truth-Bringer]

...and the peaceful liberty movement will be weakened or destroyed by those the condone and advocate violent means. All peaceful liberty lovers will be smeared and weakened by attacks from the left and neocon right because of the actions of a violent few. When will people learn?

I agree that we should seek a non-violent revolution. That is the ultimate goal.

But if some people succumb to violent actions, I can certainly understand their anger. After all, this government is threatening force against all of us every day - and most of the time we're acting peacefully, honestly and voluntarily - yet these tyrants want to control us. So I can understand why that has a lot of people talking about revolution.

[Vessol]

A colonial revolution=/=a revolution in a modern developed nation.

If we ever did revolt it would look more like the French Revolution then the American Revolution. There would be innumerable factions all vieing for power, foreign powers which unlike in the 18th century, can arrive here with forces in a matter of days. Not to mention the complete hand up our own military would have against any revolters, unless of course military units desert, yet doing this will automatically put them at an organizational disadvantage as our military is built around interdependence within all its units.

Long story short, revolution will never work, it usually has never worked unless it was a homogeneous colonial population rebelling from its holder.

What would happen in our case would be the few rising up would be swiftly crushed, followed by justification for a even larger police state.

Not to mention the numerous atrocities that would be committed by all sides. No war does not have that, even the Revolutionaries during the American Revolution did horrible things to Loyalists.

[Old Ducker]

"You Say You Want a Revolution? Think Again"
http://www.lewrockwell.com/maloney/maloney20.1.html

[Mach]

It doesn't even matter which way you go, the "government" throws a wrench in the gears as soon as it starts to really take off successfully.

People in general start to really warm up to freedom and then those people are shown what that freedom "really" is, so they retreat, wallowing back into a nice docile "safe" position.

":rolleyes:"

[Acala]

The lessons of history seem to suggest that empires are never overthrown by revolution. They collapse under their own weight or are overthrown by other empires. They may thrash around a bit before they accept the inevitable. But the leaders ultimately abdicate and flee.

The American Revolution didn't overthrow the British empire, indeed it barely scratched it. The combination of distance, expense, and bigger fish to fry caused the British to abandon the colonies.

By the time Rome was sacked, the Western empire was long dead from its own internal disease.

The Soviet Union was a much more tightly controlled and more brutal empire than the US and it dissolved with scarcely a shot being fired.

My prediciton - economic disaster, a traumatic weakening of the central government due to economic starvation, followed by a continuous stream of local aggitation and break aways, some that may be fought half-heartedly. But ultimately, the central government will consolidate in a MUCH smaller geographic znoe and let the rest go without a shot.

[tmosley]

A colonial revolution=/=a revolution in a modern developed nation.

If we ever did revolt it would look more like the French Revolution then the American Revolution. There would be innumerable factions all vieing for power, foreign powers which unlike in the 18th century, can arrive here with forces in a matter of days. Not to mention the complete hand up our own military would have against any revolters, unless of course military units desert, yet doing this will automatically put them at an organizational disadvantage as our military is built around interdependence within all its units.

Long story short, revolution will never work, it usually has never worked unless it was a homogeneous colonial population rebelling from its holder.

What would happen in our case would be the few rising up would be swiftly crushed, followed by justification for a even larger police state.

Not to mention the numerous atrocities that would be committed by all sides. No war does not have that, even the Revolutionaries during the American Revolution did horrible things to Loyalists.

No foreign power will ever invade these shores. We've got nukes, and delivery mechanisms. Those remain in play no matter how bad the situation gets, and believe you me, there isn't a single faction that was ever thought of that would seize a nuclear facility, and then peacefully turn it over to a foreign invader.

No, any revolution that occurs in America will either be immediately put down, or it will be relatively bloodless, depending entirely on how quickly the insurgents are able to get access to the nukes. If a major state secedes, it has done that by default. Don't worry about the military might of the US army, or anything else. The only thing that matters are the nukes. One test is all it will take to bring the other side to the negotiating table.

[Vessol]

Foreign powers would have no issue if the U.S was wracked in civil disorder. They may even be 'invited over'.

[Vessol]

It doesn't even matter which way you go, the "government" throws a wrench in the gears as soon as it starts to really take off successfully.

People in general start to really warm up to freedom and then those people are shown what that freedom "really" is, so they retreat, wallowing back into a nice docile "safe" position.

":rolleyes:"

Ah. I knew the armchair revolutionaries would come out sooner or later.

[pcosmar]

Foreign powers would have no issue if the U.S was wracked in civil disorder. They may even be 'invited over'.

They have already been invited.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=403d90d6-7a61-41ac-8cef-902a1d14879d

[fedup100]

No foreign power will ever invade these shores. We've got nukes, and delivery mechanisms. Those remain in play no matter how bad the situation gets, and believe you me, there isn't a single faction that was ever thought of that would seize a nuclear facility, and then peacefully turn it over to a foreign invader.

:eek::eek:We have already been invaded by a minimum of 30 million Mexicans. If you count the number of "other's, asian, eastern block, middle eastern's and african's we are outnumbered by 2 to 1 now. We have an illegal muslim sitting in the white house and you can't see the trojan horse sitting on pennsylvania ave.

As far as our nukes to protect us, just consider who has their finger on the button son and he ain't your friend.

No, any revolution that occurs in America will either be immediately put down, or it will be relatively bloodless, depending entirely on how quickly the insurgents are able to get access to the nukes. If a major state secedes, it has done that by default. Don't worry about the military might of the US army, or anything else. The only thing that matters are the nukes. One test is all it will take to bring the other side to the negotiating table.

There will be no need for a revolution. The fool sitting in the white house will cause the whole world to attack us in no less than a year I predict. If that doesn't work for him, he will complete his marxist take over, and the killing of 1/2 of this nation will begin in earnest. Those who oppose the pouty pussy in chief will meet the same swift end those pesky 100 million white Christians met in Russia.

We are between a rock and an insane megalomaniac people and he will get your asses killed. The time has come to get serious and begin a real campaign to impeach and remove this disaster from the white house.

I don't want to hear that it can't be done. Start it rolling now and on Dec 1st we will have the numbers to do it. I also don't want to hear it that stretched out whore Nancy will be worse. After you have taken one by the neck and rousted him out they can put Satin in there and I guarantee he will walk on egg shells until we replace his/her sorry ass.

[Stary Hickory]

The lessons of history seem to suggest that empires are never overthrown by revolution. They collapse under their own weight or are overthrown by other empires. They may thrash around a bit before they accept the inevitable. But the leaders ultimately abdicate and flee.

The American Revolution didn't overthrow the British empire, indeed it barely scratched it. The combination of distance, expense, and bigger fish to fry caused the British to abandon the colonies.

By the time Rome was sacked, the Western empire was long dead from its own internal disease.

The Soviet Union was a much more tightly controlled and more brutal empire than the US and it dissolved with scarcely a shot being fired.

My prediciton - economic disaster, a traumatic weakening of the central government due to economic starvation, followed by a continuous stream of local aggitation and break aways, some that may be fought half-heartedly. But ultimately, the central government will consolidate in a MUCH smaller geographic znoe and let the rest go without a shot.

Exactly, we are seeing the first tremors with responsible states stepping up to defend against an out of control DC. DC is like a wounded beast flailing about and anyone with any sense would try to get out of it's way and wait for it to succumb from it's mortal wounds. The consequences of constant economic irresponsibility has final delivered the telling blow.

[dwdollar]

I don't think we have reached that line yet. But, I'm not going to continuously move the line back as some would do. That is a tactic used by cowards.

By the time it reaches 1940's Germany or Stalinist Russia it is already too late to do anything about it. AND, if one were able to go back and ask those citizens to revolt, I imagine the reply by many would be something like, "It's not time yet."



...

[s35wf]

I don't think we have reached that line yet. But, I'm not going to continuously move the line back as some would do. That is a tactic used by cowards.

By the time it reaches 1940's Germany or Stalinist Russia it is already too late to do anything about it. AND, if one were able to go back and ask those citizens to revolt, I imagine the reply by many would be something like, "It's not time yet."



...
I would think after the 2010 or 2012 elections; if things DC dont change its tune; then our economic collapse will bring violence on its on accord which will start the revolution/wars to begin. :(

[klamath]

"You Say You Want a Revolution? Think Again"
http://www.lewrockwell.com/maloney/maloney20.1.html

A good piece that needs to be read by a lot of people. My bolding.

Let us make one thing crystal clear: We do not claim the right to indiscriminate violence. We seek no bloodbath…

~ Black Panther Party (March 23, 1968)


One of the benefits of writing for this website is the mail you receive. After enough time you get a rather good feel for the type of person, on average, that frequents this place. The kind invitations I received after my last submission to grab my AK, run to the mountains, and join the fun when it all falls apart was telling. If the rebellious spirit of our Founders still lives at all, it seems to be concentrated between two groups – libertarians and punks. But, while the spirit may reside, would it be a good idea to act on it?

The right to rebellion is sacrosanct in America, the completely humane, just, and natural right of any man to break bonds with another is embodied not only in our very Founding but in our divorce laws, too. No American would consent to law making marriage an indivisible, eternal commitment; we refuse any compulsion to remain wedded to the girl of our nightmares, let alone the likes of Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Anyone who questions the right of divorce and (if made necessary by the political elite) violent action to secure it is, like the pro-slavery proponents of the Old South, seriously deficient in humanity.

Any discussion regarding the dissolution of political bonds belongs to, and only to, the working masses. Naturally, the opinion of any politician regarding this question may be completely discounted. First off, it is none of their business; servants do not determine the length of their employment. Second, addiction to power is in their very nature; it is the be all and end all of their existence. To expect an Obama or a W (or any of their species) to allow the working masses their right to peaceful separation is like expecting a hungry lion to spit out the wounded zebra it has clutched in its jaws.

It takes a statesman, a philosopher king, so to speak, to understand the benefits and justice of liberty, to understand that everywhere and always the struggle for it is the struggle of the workers against the political elite. A true statesman must be a traitor to his class, to be part of what the great Karl Marx promised, "a small section of the ruling class (which) cuts itself adrift, and joins the revolutionary class."


Today, almost without exception, America’s ruling caste is bereft of such men.


The Write Way Towards Freedom

…Any change remains possible because citizens are free to communicate with and persuade one another and express their political opinions without being threatened by the Government with criminal sanctions.

~ Glenn Greenwald, Salon.com (March 22, 2010)


The best example of such a statesman is Thomas Jefferson, without doubt the most radical and progressive of the Founders, a man who, unlike even so many of his contemporaries, not only supported the idea of rebellion but also positively encouraged it. This was, and is, in stark contrast to power-mad figures like Alexander Hamilton and Che Guevara, men who are called "revolutionaries" but were nothing of the sort, who as soon struck off the chains of one tyrant went immediately to pot and looked about in a panic for a new set to clamp round their neck.


Jefferson, in contrast, was a true revolutionary, it was a subject he lived and studied his entire life. He believed that while war may be required to get out from under oppressive regimes, it is first of all necessary to have the proper, rational animating idea behind it, to make more likely the rebellion will be a positive step towards liberty rather than what so many revolutions sadly turn out to be; foolish, reactionary steps back into greater political control. Thomas Jefferson’s ideas culminated in the bloodless "Revolution of 1800," when he took the presidency and firmly established, for a few years at least, an Executive Branch with a decidedly progressive, radical attitude towards power. This was accomplished not by war, but by the spread of ideas, something done best by, in Thomas Jefferson’s words, "the vast dissemination of books." Political leaders burn and ban books for a reason.

Always it is a nation’s intellectuals, those who actually read and write the books, who spread the ideas vital to the advance and preservation of liberty. It is telling that while the ideological views put forth in best-sellers such as Edward Kennedy’s True Compass, Sarah Palin’s Going Rogue, and Barack Obama’s Audacity of Hope are not what progressive revolutions are made of, they are today as "mainstream" and apple pie as can be. Consequentially, a revolution today would be a decided step back as it would lack the ideological roadmap to go anywhere but deeper into the badlands.


If this union is to return to its progressive roots it will be not by the sword but by the writings of those dedicated to a philosophy of liberation, by the wide dissemination of radical thought into the op-ed pages and editorials of our newspapers, into the comments section to Internet news sites, into the mouths of the interviewed "man on the street," into the intellectuals’ monthly journals and thence most importantly, into the minds of men. It is here where even the most humble advocate of liberty can make a difference, it is the necessary first step that, should we fail to take it, will bring any hard-earned advances to naught.

Pick up your pen and write until your fingers go numb, submit an avalanche, cross you fingers, and hope for the best. That is the one and only way to pull out of this tailspin. Patience and endless repetition, above all, are needed. Keep in mind the words of Rexford Tugwell (one of the more reactionary and conservative of FDR’s "Brain Trust") that "a nation does not take a new direction overnight." (Tugwell, 105) Remember that for decades FDR and his fellows wandered in the intellectual wilderness, yet steadily chipped away at the edifice of law, using small, but friendly, publications such as The Review of Reviews and The New Republic as their base of operations.

At this point in time, the average American citizen neither understands nor desires liberty. Today, even in the unlikely event of victory on the battlefield for the forces of liberty, it would all quickly amount to nothing. Freedom is impossible to force onto a people, and we would soon find, as even did God with the rebellious angels He cast out of heaven, that he "who overcomes by force, hath overcome but half his foe." (Milton, 32)

So leave your AK hanging over the fireplace, it is not time for that.


Divorce Court

We hold these truths to be self-evident…that whenever any form of government becomes destructive…it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.

~ Declaration of Independence (1776)


As an alternative to open rebellion, some raise the age-old question of secession, seeing the federal behemoth broken up by a peaceful, democratic process. Should anyone think those people in D.C. will simply let the workers go free, as if Pharaoh will give Moses and the Israelites (after a hardy clap on the back and a best of luck) leave to walk away into the desert, a quick trip to any library’s history section should quickly end their delusion.

While Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. effectively practiced passive resistance this, too, is no means to bring about peaceful change as the political mind is, above all, exceedingly prone to violence. It was once written of Europe’s rulers "these were fierce and lawless…war was the business and delight of their existence" (Mackay, 293) and pick up today’s papers and see, is the American politician any different?

Judging by their past and current behavior, from the War of Terror to that on drugs, or obesity, or smutty television shows, America’s ruling class look for any excuse to call out an army, be it of soldiers, police, or bureaucrats. Goading a political beast as highly militarized as the US federal government, even by use of a vote to secede or a simple, peaceful course of civic disobedience is to guarantee bloodshed. While Lincoln most certainly did not put to rest the question of the right to secede, he most certainly did put to rest any question of how America’s political elite will react to any sign of it. Forget "In God We Trust," it’d be better that every US dollar bear a more accurate slogan for our current regime. "If I Can’t Have You, Nobody Will."

So vote to secede or not, engage in peaceful resistance or not, if you want out of America you are going to have to fight your way out, and as of this moment we are not ideologically prepared for that struggle. Years after the glory of 1776, John Adams reminisced to Thomas Jefferson about what, more than anything, allowed such a progressive victory to be gained. He dismissed the actual fighting as of no import to the revolution, "it was only an effect and consequence of it," meaning the true revolution takes place in the minds of men before you can have any hope of success, before any rifle is loaded. "The Revolution," Mr. Adams went on to say, "was in the minds of the people, and this was effected…before a drop of blood was shed at Lexington." (Bailyn, 1)

Before America can be liberated, she must first desire it.


If you like this site, please help keep it going and growing.



A Change Is Gonna Come

If (a revolution) happens, I expect it will more closely resemble the French Revolution than the one in 1776."

~ Wendy McElroy (2010)


Today, give me liberty or give me death no longer rings true, the typical American is content to put up with any outrage because he’s so ideologically stripped as to no longer have any idea he should be outraged. Harboring a completely materialistic view of politics that equates material comfort with freedom, he’ll bear any assault on liberty with timid submission so long as the hi-def cable stays on. The intellectuals fare no better in this regard, as they are the very ones who spread the ideas that made hi-def cable more important to us than trial by jury.

In the event of rebellion, the American people would lack any leadership with the ability, or even the urge, to guide them back to liberty. Even if the occasional outrage morphs into a tea party, the vast majority of Americans, lead by the intellectuals, take most assaults with quiet approval, and for now I thank God for it. To go to war is something even the most ignorant savage does with relish; but to start a revolution requires the ability for calm, rational thought and a manly courage to risk it all that does not currently exist in this country. Where once our forefathers shot at government troops marching through the Massachusetts countryside towards Lexington and Concord, today we are a frightened little flock that goes to pieces at the thought of Goldman Sachs suffering a well-deserved bankruptcy. 2010 America does not possess what successful revolutions are made of.

So, thank you all who sent me a kind invitation to share a mess kit and a fight, but when you Thomas Jefferson wannabes grab your AK-47s, pull on your surplus camouflage uniforms, and go rushing off into the mountains please count me out and don’t wait up. I’ll be watching the slaughter from afar, Barcelona perhaps, Amsterdam more likely, and doubtless I’ll wish good luck and God speed to you all.

As of right now this country is simply not prepared for secession, civic disobedience, or rebellion; and under the current regime they all would be considered the same in the eyes of the ruling elite. Any move in that direction would be setting you up for a hopeless task; to free a people that neither wish for liberty or could handle it if won.

Read the op-ed pages and editorials of any newspaper, glance at the comments section to any Internet news site, and listen to the interviewed "man on the street," read our intellectuals’ monthly journals and agree; modern America is too uncivilized and savage for freedom.

If you wish for a change back to liberty, forget your rifle – grab your pen.

[Kade]

Revolution in America, what would it be like?
I have seen post after post about the glory of the American revolution and how man must fight for his freedom now against the terror of government.

The war Gods turn to us and ask. "Are you sure this is what you want? Do you know what you are asking? When you ask us to judge we will decide and there is no turning back. We have a fee we never waive, and that is blood of the innocent as well as the guilty." They know not what they ask for but so shall it be.

Revolution now would not have the king to rally against. A revolution now would not have the Union to rally against. If a revolution is small it will be crushed by the federal army. If it is large enough to challenge the government it will be many armies and many factions. Once the federal army is weakened the armies will turn against themselves. The Red guards from MA will take on the VT Patriot militia. The LA White knights and the Harlem Black Knights will engage in battle. States against states, groups against groups, individuals against individuals. Not just anarchists and libertarians have their goals for what the new America should look like. There are socialists, communists, Nazi, Zionists American Indians, etc etc that would see it as the opportunity to carve out their long dreamed of utopia. Now let's add in the foreign armies from those counties that don't have their own civil wars. The Chinese announce to the world that in order to stop the bloodshed in America they are deploying the 20 million man peoples army to install order. The Europeans ralley what is left of the UN and deploy a UN army under the same pretext. Will you be more free in the end? The war Gods will decide and you have no choice but bow your head and accept what they rule.


Epic post sir... maybe I am not needed on these forums. Reasonable people do exist.

[tmosley]

There will be no need for a revolution. The fool sitting in the white house will cause the whole world to attack us in no less than a year I predict. If that doesn't work for him, he will complete his marxist take over, and the killing of 1/2 of this nation will begin in earnest. Those who oppose the pouty pussy in chief will meet the same swift end those pesky 100 million white Christians met in Russia.

We are between a rock and an insane megalomaniac people and he will get your asses killed. The time has come to get serious and begin a real campaign to impeach and remove this disaster from the white house.

I don't want to hear that it can't be done. Start it rolling now and on Dec 1st we will have the numbers to do it. I also don't want to hear it that stretched out whore Nancy will be worse. After you have taken one by the neck and rousted him out they can put Satin in there and I guarantee he will walk on egg shells until we replace his/her sorry ass.

Uhhhhh....no. Take your meds, then try again. Also, I would suggest you refrain from allowing a unicorn to puke all over your keyboard as you type. The pretty, pretty colors make your post hard to read.

Obama is not a Muslim (not that it matters, Muslims aren't the enemy). If anything he's an atheist. He's an ideologue for the statist team, which is the same team that has been in office for most of a hundred years. Unlike Bush, he hasn't committed any high crimes, save being accused of not being born in America, a charge that is clearly false, but people just won't shut up about it.

The point is that there are numerous nuclear installations, and the seizure of just one nuke out of one of those institutions will make the holder a legitimate new state, one that is more or less immune to invasion (lest that nuke go off in Washington). Of course more is better, but just one is probably enough.

[Jeros]

Revolution in America, what would it be like?
I have seen post after post about the glory of the American revolution and how man must fight for his freedom now against the terror of government.

The war Gods turn to us and ask. "Are you sure this is what you want? Do you know what you are asking? When you ask us to judge we will decide and there is no turning back. We have a fee we never waive, and that is blood of the innocent as well as the guilty." They know not what they ask for but so shall it be.


If a revolution occurs in America, I'll be moving back to the lush remote forests of Del Norte County. The Smith and the Klamath are all I need. I'll have to go meet up with Justin Raimondo too.

[seeker4sho]

A good piece that needs to be read by a lot of people. My bolding.

Let us make one thing crystal clear: We do not claim the right to indiscriminate violence. We seek no bloodbath…

~ Black Panther Party (March 23, 1968)


One of the benefits of writing for this website is the mail you receive. After enough time you get a rather good feel for the type of person, on average, that frequents this place. The kind invitations I received after my last submission to grab my AK, run to the mountains, and join the fun when it all falls apart was telling. If the rebellious spirit of our Founders still lives at all, it seems to be concentrated between two groups – libertarians and punks. But, while the spirit may reside, would it be a good idea to act on it?

The right to rebellion is sacrosanct in America, the completely humane, just, and natural right of any man to break bonds with another is embodied not only in our very Founding but in our divorce laws, too. No American would consent to law making marriage an indivisible, eternal commitment; we refuse any compulsion to remain wedded to the girl of our nightmares, let alone the likes of Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Anyone who questions the right of divorce and (if made necessary by the political elite) violent action to secure it is, like the pro-slavery proponents of the Old South, seriously deficient in humanity.

Any discussion regarding the dissolution of political bonds belongs to, and only to, the working masses. Naturally, the opinion of any politician regarding this question may be completely discounted. First off, it is none of their business; servants do not determine the length of their employment. Second, addiction to power is in their very nature; it is the be all and end all of their existence. To expect an Obama or a W (or any of their species) to allow the working masses their right to peaceful separation is like expecting a hungry lion to spit out the wounded zebra it has clutched in its jaws.

It takes a statesman, a philosopher king, so to speak, to understand the benefits and justice of liberty, to understand that everywhere and always the struggle for it is the struggle of the workers against the political elite. A true statesman must be a traitor to his class, to be part of what the great Karl Marx promised, "a small section of the ruling class (which) cuts itself adrift, and joins the revolutionary class."


Today, almost without exception, America’s ruling caste is bereft of such men.


The Write Way To wards Freedom

…Any change remains possible because citizens are free to communicate with and persuade one another and express their political opinions without being threatened by the Government with criminal sanctions.

~ Glenn Greenwald, Salon.com (March 22, 2010)


The best example of such a statesman is Thomas Jefferson, without doubt the most radical and progressive of the Founders, a man who, unlike even so many of his contemporaries, not only supported the idea of rebellion but also positively encouraged it. This was, and is, in stark contrast to power-mad figures like Alexander Hamilton and Che Guevara, men who are called "revolutionaries" but were nothing of the sort, who as soon struck off the chains of one tyrant went immediately to pot and looked about in a panic for a new set to clamp round their neck.


Jefferson, in contrast, was a true revolutionary, it was a subject he lived and studied his entire life. He believed that while war may be required to get out from under oppressive regimes, it is first of all necessary to have the proper, rational animating idea behind it, to make more likely the rebellion will be a positive step to wards liberty rather than what so many revolutions sadly turn out to be; foolish, reactionary steps back into greater political control. Thomas Jefferson’s ideas culminated in the bloodless "Revolution of 1800," when he took the presidency and firmly established, for a few years at least, an Executive Branch with a decidedly progressive, radical attitude to wards power. This was accomplished not by war, but by the spread of ideas, something done best by, in Thomas Jefferson’s words, "the vast dissemination of books." Political leaders burn and ban books for a reason.

Always it is a nation’s intellectuals, those who actually read and write the books, who spread the ideas vital to the advance and preservation of liberty. It is telling that while the ideological views put forth in best-sellers such as Edward Kennedy’s True Compass, Sarah Palin’s Going Rogue, and Barack Obama’s Audacity of Hope are not what progressive revolutions are made of, they are today as "mainstream" and apple pie as can be. Consequentially, a revolution today would be a decided step back as it would lack the ideological roadmap to go anywhere but deeper into the badlands.


If this union is to return to its progressive roots it will be not by the sword but by the writings of those dedicated to a philosophy of liberation, by the wide dissemination of radical thought into the op-ed pages and editorials of our newspapers, into the comments section to Internet news sites, into the mouths of the interviewed "man on the street," into the intellectuals’ monthly journals and thence most importantly, into the minds of men. It is here where even the most humble advocate of liberty can make a difference, it is the necessary first step that, should we fail to take it, will bring any hard-earned advances to naught.

Pick up your pen and write until your fingers go numb, submit an avalanche, cross you fingers, and hope for the best. That is the one and only way to pull out of this tailspin. Patience and endless repetition, above all, are needed. Keep in mind the words of Rexford Tugwell (one of the more reactionary and conservative of FDR’s "Brain Trust") that "a nation does not take a new direction overnight." (Tugwell, 105) Remember that for decades FDR and his fellows wandered in the intellectual wilderness, yet steadily chipped away at the edifice of law, using small, but friendly, publications such as The Review of Reviews and The New Republic as their base of operations.

At this point in time, the average American citizen neither understands nor desires liberty. Today, even in the unlikely event of victory on the battlefield for the forces of liberty, it would all quickly amount to nothing. Freedom is impossible to force onto a people, and we would soon find, as even did God with the rebellious angels He cast out of heaven, that he "who overcomes by force, hath overcome but half his foe." (Milton, 32)

So leave your AK hanging over the fireplace, it is not time for that.


Divorce Court

We hold these truths to be self-evident…that whenever any form of government becomes destructive…it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.

~ Declaration of Independence (1776)


As an alternative to open rebellion, some raise the age-old question of secession, seeing the federal behemoth broken up by a peaceful, democratic process. Should anyone think those people in D.C. will simply let the workers go free, as if Pharaoh will give Moses and the Israelites (after a hardy clap on the back and a best of luck) leave to walk away into the desert, a quick trip to any library’s history section should quickly end their delusion.

While Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. effectively practiced passive resistance this, too, is no means to bring about peaceful change as the political mind is, above all, exceedingly prone to violence. It was once written of Europe’s rulers "these were fierce and lawless…war was the business and delight of their existence" (Mackay, 293) and pick up today’s papers and see, is the American politician any different?

Judging by their past and current behavior, from the War of Terror to that on drugs, or obesity, or smutty television shows, America’s ruling class look for any excuse to call out an army, be it of soldiers, police, or bureaucrats. Goading a political beast as highly militarized as the US federal government, even by use of a vote to secede or a simple, peaceful course of civic disobedience is to guarantee bloodshed. While Lincoln most certainly did not put to rest the question of the right to secede, he most certainly did put to rest any question of how America’s political elite will react to any sign of it. Forget "In God We Trust," it’d be better that every US dollar bear a more accurate slogan for our current regime. "If I Can’t Have You, Nobody Will."

So vote to secede or not, engage in peaceful resistance or not, if you want out of America you are going to have to fight your way out, and as of this moment we are not ideologically prepared for that struggle. Years after the glory of 1776, John Adams reminisced to Thomas Jefferson about what, more than anything, allowed such a progressive victory to be gained. He dismissed the actual fighting as of no import to the revolution, "it was only an effect and consequence of it," meaning the true revolution takes place in the minds of men before you can have any hope of success, before any rifle is loaded. "The Revolution," Mr. Adams went on to say, "was in the minds of the people, and this was effected…before a drop of blood was shed at Lexington." (Bailyn, 1)

Before America can be liberated, she must first desire it.


If you like this site, please help keep it going and growing.



A Change Is Gonna Come

If (a revolution) happens, I expect it will more closely resemble the French Revolution than the one in 1776."

~ Wendy McElroy (2010)


Today, give me liberty or give me death no longer rings true, the typical American is content to put up with any outrage because he’s so ideologically stripped as to no longer have any idea he should be outraged. Harboring a completely materialistic view of politics that equates material comfort with freedom, he’ll bear any assault on liberty with timid submission so long as the hi-def cable stays on. The intellectuals fare no better in this regard, as they are the very ones who spread the ideas that made hi-def cable more important to us than trial by jury.

In the event of rebellion, the American people would lack any leadership with the ability, or even the urge, to guide them back to liberty. Even if the occasional outrage morphs into a tea party, the vast majority of Americans, lead by the intellectuals, take most assaults with quiet approval, and for now I thank God for it. To go to war is something even the most ignorant savage does with relish; but to start a revolution requires the ability for calm, rational thought and a manly courage to risk it all that does not currently exist in this country. Where once our forefathers shot at government troops marching through the Massachusetts countryside to wards Lexington and Concord, today we are a frightened little flock that goes to pieces at the thought of Goldman Sachs suffering a well-deserved bankruptcy. 2010 America does not possess what successful revolutions are made of.

So, thank you all who sent me a kind invitation to share a mess kit and a fight, but when you Thomas Jefferson wannabes grab your AK-47s, pull on your surplus camouflage uniforms, and go rushing off into the mountains please count me out and don’t wait up. I’ll be watching the slaughter from afar, Barcelona perhaps, Amsterdam more likely, and doubtless I’ll wish good luck and God speed to you all.

As of right now this country is simply not prepared for secession, civic disobedience, or rebellion; and under the current regime they all would be considered the same in the eyes of the ruling elite. Any move in that direction would be setting you up for a hopeless task; to free a people that neither wish for liberty or could handle it if won.

Read the op-ed pages and editorials of any newspaper, glance at the comments section to any Internet news site, and listen to the interviewed "man on the street," read our intellectuals’ monthly journals and agree; modern America is too uncivilized and savage for freedom.

If you wish for a change back to liberty, forget your rifle – grab your pen.

Excellent piece!

I partially disagree with the following statement: "While Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. effectively practiced passive resistance this, too, is no means to bring about peaceful change as the political mind is, above all, exceedingly prone to violence." Passive resistance can be effective when liberty has been severely limited and the majority of people want to break the stranglehold of a tyrannical government. In a Republic passive protest/resistance takes on many different forms including voting, marching in the streets, and writing letters, to name a few. Until our leaders in Congress blatantly ignore the will of the people and the country becomes a totalitarian dictatorship, we have those options to affect change.

[mediahasyou]

http://lewebpedagogique.com/bsentier/files/03_banksy_flowers_molotov.gif

[Rael]

The lessons of history seem to suggest that empires are never overthrown by revolution. They collapse under their own weight or are overthrown by other empires. They may thrash around a bit before they accept the inevitable. But the leaders ultimately abdicate and flee.

The American Revolution didn't overthrow the British empire, indeed it barely scratched it. The combination of distance, expense, and bigger fish to fry caused the British to abandon the colonies.

By the time Rome was sacked, the Western empire was long dead from its own internal disease.

The Soviet Union was a much more tightly controlled and more brutal empire than the US and it dissolved with scarcely a shot being fired.

My prediciton - economic disaster, a traumatic weakening of the central government due to economic starvation, followed by a continuous stream of local aggitation and break aways, some that may be fought half-heartedly. But ultimately, the central government will consolidate in a MUCH smaller geographic znoe and let the rest go without a shot.

This makes the most sense to me. You seem pretty informed about the subject. Any reading suggestions?

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Perhaps that is UEW's Civil Purpose.

Do you have a better name for it?

[heavenlyboy34]

I don't see violent revolution as a practical idea. It would beget more violence than it could prevent. JMO. I'm working towards individual secession at the moment. :cool:

[Anti Federalist]

Violent revolution should only be used when we reach the levels of Stalinist Russia or 1940s Germany. Until then will should fight with our mind, not with our hands.

By then it will be too late.

Waiting to educate a mass will be too late.

It's probably too late now.

Of course war is a bloody mess, it is, after all, the continuation of politics by other means.

A century or two or twenty of tyranny is worse.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Your non sequiturs seem to know no bounds.



Come on, get over yourself. You put on more airs than perhaps every smug aristocrat in the history of Europe combined. You've borrowed a few formal terms occasionally used by Enlightenment thinkers in formal documents, melded them with your own contrivances and petty remarks about Europeans, and transformed the synthesis into an entire dialect of speaking...which you seem to use everywhere. Dan Berkeley called it "management speak." He was correct in the sense that it's overinflated, convoluted, and entirely bereft of non-trivial meaning that's new to anyone here, but the pomp and grandiosity you use to feign philosophical superiority puts your jargon in an entirely new league of "profundus maximus." (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/profundusmaximus.htm)

I happen to be one of the few in this forum who realizes that there is a difference between a "civil right" and a "natural right." I've tried laying this subtle point out in a way that isn't offensive or condescending.
I've been working this out slowly for a while now. If you don't understand, then it means you haven't been keeping up. But that doesn't matter to me anyway because Americans don't need any further political manipulation. I'm for legal abstinence, not civil disobedience. I'm for establishing the people's Civil Purpose over legal precedence by way of legislating, administrating, and judicating as little of it as possible. We solve problems on the local level, we cause big problems by lobbying on the Federal level. That kind of thing.
Anyway, I do hope you understand and will have a good day.

[klamath]

I agree that we should seek a non-violent revolution. That is the ultimate goal.

But if some people succumb to violent actions, I can certainly understand their anger. After all, this government is threatening force against all of us every day - and most of the time we're acting peacefully, honestly and voluntarily - yet these tyrants want to control us. So I can understand why that has a lot of people talking about revolution.
We all have moments of anger that drives us to say violent things in passion. This thread is aimed at those that are getting caught up in the ranting of those members that are not just saying things in anger but plotting, premeditated with malice aforethought violence. They are salivating at the thought of seeing men and women die under their firepower all the while covering it with statements of "it is just in defence". It is called pump the troops up so they will commit horrible acts of violence all in the name of liberty. I have a number of these videos on my computer made of the Iraq war by guys I know. The words of these keyboard warriors are nearly the same only the country and targets are different.

[Anti Federalist]

This thread is aimed at those that are getting caught up in the ranting of those members that are not just saying things in anger but plotting, premeditated with malice aforethought violence. They are salivating at the thought of seeing men and women die under their firepower all the while covering it with statements of "it is just in defence".

Cite these examples.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

We all have moments of anger that drives us to say violent things in passion. This thread is aimed at those that are getting caught up in the ranting of those members that are not just saying things in anger but plotting, premeditated with malice aforethought violence. They are salivating at the thought of seeing men and women die under their firepower all the while covering it with statements of "it is just in defence". It is called pump the troops up so they will commit horrible acts of violence all in the name of liberty. I have a number of these videos on my computer made of the Iraq war by guys I know. The words of these keyboard warriors are nearly the same only the country and targets are different.

It is the rational people who become violent, not the envisioned ones. Our Founding Fathers became envisioned not because of their own light, but because of the light of the many founders preceeding them dating back to Socrates who was the primary founder of western civilization.
In other words, there did not need to be an American revolution against tyranny as a rightful king ordained with God's authority would have accepted their argument outright resulting in peace.
Contrary to what one would be most inclined to think about them, our Founding Fathers were not rational in the use of logic. The use of such had fallen by the wayside during their time because of Galileo's persecution by the natural philosophy developed from the works of Aristotle and adopted by the Catholic religion as God's natural laws.
Aside from all this, when we see how God rules with infinite patience as a shepherd from the midst of the flock being submissive to the false authority exhibited by the strong ones in front of Him and tolerant of the lack of faith of the weak ones behind Him, we become peaceful. As it is going to be quite difficult for this nation's posteriety to live a happy life in the future, this will give them a way to rule.

[Anti Federalist]

Cite these examples.

Anybody got any?

[Anti Federalist]

^^^ Nobody?

Anybody?

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

^^^ Nobody?

Anybody?

I do not know how to grow corn having gone to college instead to learn about sociology and psychology. Because of my extensive education into these cognitive science courses, I am not prejudice.
Therefore, I am not violent.

[Anti Federalist]

I do not know how to grow corn having gone to college instead to learn about sociology and psychology. Because of my extensive education into these cognitive science courses, I am not prejudice.
Therefore, I am not violent.

Thank you Uncle, but this is fucking important.

I don't have time for your intellectual sophistries and riddles right now.

C'mon, I want to see some of those examples of "certain members" (as one of the more "militant" people here, that is clearly directed at me) that are "salivating at the prospect" of blood and guts and veins in our teeth. (apologies to Arlo Guthrie)

So far all I've seen is a bunch of hand wringing that says no solution is possible until every single person agrees with us, and until such time, well, just suck up the tyranny, since the American people are "too far gone and Imma gonna bolt overseas, later dudes"...

Those planning an es-cape (more apologies to Arlo Guthrie) are going to be very chagrined to find there is no place left to run.

My position is very clear, I want a peaceful separation.

The crazy ex wife, the abusive ex husband, take your pick, is bound and determined to not allow that to happen.

So, I suppose we just better get our asses back in that goddamned kitchen and make dinner, eh?

[AuH20]

The constant talk of violent rebellion is ticking me off. Maybe, someday, when all peaceful options have been tried, and they have not, and when government oppression is a LOT worse than it is now, maybe then I will entertain talk of violence. And I am just saying entertain, not agree.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

The fact that they won't let a paleoconservative/libertarian candidate even near the presidency hasn't given you a subtle hint? Politics are a dead end, when you have the MSM controlling and interpreting all information, along with the two political gangs divying up the spoils from their globalist masters. It's over. Ron will never be president just like it was impossible for Goldwater as well as Buchanan. Nothing will change.

Like I said numerous times, this type of political movement is more about ideas than political domination. That's why it's imperative that Rand wins, so his rare viewpoint can be circulated throughout the land. The sheep need to be exposed to an alternative viewpoint when their fabricated, myopic world finally comes to a crashing halt. We have to instill courage in more of the sheep, so they don't cower when the real crackdown comes. That's the prime directive. Preparation via enlightenment.

[AuH20]

Thank you Uncle, but this is fucking important.

I don't have time for your intellectual sophistries and riddles right now.

C'mon, I want to see some of those examples of "certain members" (as one of the more "militant" people here, that is clearly directed at me) that are "salivating at the prospect" of blood and guts and veins in our teeth. (apologies to Arlo Guthrie)

So far all I've seen is a bunch of hand wringing that says no solution is possible until every single person agrees with us, and until such time, well, just suck up the tyranny, since the American people are "too far gone and Imma gonna bolt overseas, later dudes"...

Those planning an es-cape (more apologies to Arlo Guthrie) are going to be very chagrined to find there is no place left to run.

My position is very clear, I want a peaceful separation.

The crazy ex wife, the abusive ex husband, take your pick, is bound and determined to not allow that to happen.

So, I suppose we just better get our asses back in that goddamned kitchen and make dinner, eh?


I think the term is 'sunshine patriot.'

[pcosmar]

Thank you Uncle, but this is fucking important.

I don't have time for your intellectual sophistries and riddles right now.

C'mon, I want to see some of those examples of "certain members" (as one of the more "militant" people here, that is clearly directed at me) that are "salivating at the prospect" of blood and guts and veins in our teeth. (apologies to Arlo Guthrie)

So far all I've seen is a bunch of hand wringing that says no solution is possible until every single person agrees with us, and until such time, well, just suck up the tyranny, since the American people are "too far gone and Imma gonna bolt overseas, later dudes"...

Those planning an es-cape (more apologies to Arlo Guthrie) are going to be very chagrined to find there is no place left to run.

My position is very clear, I want a peaceful separation.

The crazy ex wife, the abusive ex husband, take your pick, is bound and determined to not allow that to happen.

So, I suppose we just better get our asses back in that goddamned kitchen and make dinner, eh?

Copied from,, elsewhere


Nothing we say or do now matters. That is the bottom line. That doesn't mean stop saying and doing. That means that change will only come when enough of the people stand up and push back. There is a breaking point. Just as everything it is a numbers game. There will be no small group that overthrows the giant with a million tentacles. There will be no behind the scenes take over. It comes down to numbers. You can try to isolate the head and then figure up how many it will take to remove the head, but that must be immediately followed up by removing all the heads of each tentacle, swiftly. We're not talking about small numbers. We're talking about either a majority in each state or a military coupe. Might makes right.

To get those kinds of numbers people will have to suffer much, much more. People are just now publicly groaning. There will need to be political imprisonment on a large scale to envoke the rage of the people. They will have to tax us literally into poverty. The gap between the haves and the have-nots will have to look like the Grand Canyon.

Any stupid moves, and yes they are stupid moves, will be suicide. You won't be a martyr but only more fodder to show the sheep. Only more faces to show the sheep that they are surrounded by evil men and that their god, The Federal Corporation of the United States (r), will come to save them. If some of us are bold enough to expose oursleves so that we will be picked off and imprisoned then we must accept that we will be sacrifices. There will be no one to save us. It is the price we will pay until our numbers overflow the prisons all across this nation. That, the people cannot ignore. Unfortunately, until this opression is laid heavily upon every man, woman and child in this nation, until all Americans have been touched by the iron fist of the tyrrant, there will be no salvation.

I do not like violence, and neither expect nor call for a "revolution."
I do expect violence to come.
I expect to meet it.
Dying is assured. Living free is not.

[JK/SEA]

//

[klamath]

I would rather the liberty yearning young people organize money bombs, letter writing campaigns, signwaves and canvassing against horrific government actions 80% of the American people voted for, than follow a fool hardy path that will in the end see their remains poured into body bags. The spilling of their blood will only change the number of people supporting the government from 80% to 90%. A poor price to pay for a loss of even greater freedom.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Thank you Uncle, but this is fucking important.

I don't have time for your intellectual sophistries and riddles right now.

C'mon, I want to see some of those examples of "certain members" (as one of the more "militant" people here, that is clearly directed at me) that are "salivating at the prospect" of blood and guts and veins in our teeth. (apologies to Arlo Guthrie)

So far all I've seen is a bunch of hand wringing that says no solution is possible until every single person agrees with us, and until such time, well, just suck up the tyranny, since the American people are "too far gone and Imma gonna bolt overseas, later dudes"...

Those planning an es-cape (more apologies to Arlo Guthrie) are going to be very chagrined to find there is no place left to run.

My position is very clear, I want a peaceful separation.

The crazy ex wife, the abusive ex husband, take your pick, is bound and determined to not allow that to happen.

So, I suppose we just better get our asses back in that goddamned kitchen and make dinner, eh?

The Truth is the Truth regardless of violence. If what we desire is the Truth, then why should we be so hot about it? It isn't like the Truth is going to neglect us. So, stop trying to prop up a building that is just a house of cards. Just let them legislate, administer, and judge themselves out of business.

[AuH20]

Copied from,, elsewhere



I do not like violence, and neither expect nor call for a "revolution."
I do expect violence to come.
I expect to meet it.
Dying is assured. Living free is not.


It's interesting that I was perusing the comment section on an Infowars article about the health care penalties last week and this 16 year old kid asked the veterans on the board, "Why did you let the tyrannical government wrest control from the citizenry over the years? How could you let this happen?" The plea for an explanation penetrated my cranium like a diamond bullet.

We're all in one way or another, responsible for the maturation of the beast, and it brings a tear to my eye that these younger citizens must pay for our crimes. We have a moral obligation to look the beast in the eye and not blink. So no more backtracking and rationalizing unrealistic outcomes, it's time to organize and shove back if necessary.

[Anti Federalist]

I would rather the liberty yearning young people organize money bombs, letter writing campaigns, signwaves and canvassing against horrific government actions 80% of the American people voted for, than follow a fool hardy path that will in the end see their remains poured into body bags. The spilling of their blood will only change the number of people supporting the government from 80% to 90%. A poor price to pay for a loss of even greater freedom.

I agree, these are important efforts as part of larger overall strategy.

Now, please cite the instances of members of this board, that you claim are doing the following:


They are salivating at the thought of seeing men and women die under their firepower

[Anti Federalist]

It's interesting that I was perusing the comment section on an Infowars article about the health care penalties last week and this 16 year old kid asked the veterans on the board, "Why did you let the tyrannical government wrest control from the citizenry over the years? How you could let this happen" It penetrated my cranium like a diamond bullet.

We're all in one way or another, responsible for the maturation of the beast, and it brings a tear to my eye that these younger citizens must pay for our crimes. We have a moral obligation to look the beast in the eye and not blink. So no more backtracking and rationalizing unrealistic outcomes, it's time to organize and shove back if necessary.

I don't have access to the clapping Citzen Kane/Matt Collins gif right now, so I'll just say...

+1776

[Cowlesy]

The fact that they won't let a paleoconservative/libertarian candidate even near the presidency hasn't given you a subtle hint? Politics are a dead end, when you have the MSM controlling and interpreting all information & the two political gangs divying up the spoils from their globalist masters. It's over. Ron will never be president just like it was impossible for Goldwater as well as Buchanan. Nothing will change.

Like I said numerous times, this type of political movement is more about ideas than political domination. That's why it's imperative that Rand win, so his rare viewpoint can be circulated throughout the land. The sheep need to be exposed to an alternative viewpoint when their fabricated, myopic world finally comes to a crashing halt. We have to instill courage in more of the sheep, so they don't cower when the real crackdown comes. That's the prime directive. Preparation via enlightenment.

Another part of a Traditional-conservative not being present in the Senate or Executive Branch is the fact that we are always a movement-divided. As many views as conservatives like me share with libertarians, we can never coalition-build and team-up to get anything done. We did pretty well with someone like Ron (as evidenced by the fundraising and the growing influence of the Campaign for Liberty), but I cringe to ever look at Rand's facebook as it's clogged with comments denigrating him for X, Y or Z by the libertarians. Meanwhile, the opposition of democrats and neo-conservative are gladly joining up to take out the traditional-conservative.

They're just better at playing the game than we are because we are constantly digging our heels in and letting them win.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Copied from,, elsewhere



I do not like violence, and neither expect nor call for a "revolution."
I do expect violence to come.
I expect to meet it.
Dying is assured. Living free is not.

As it was the Truth that set us free, there is no shameful defeat in the Truth. This means that I love my enemies. While I am from Texas, I don't look north as a proud American; but, I look to that self evident Truth declared by my Founding Fathers.

[Anti Federalist]

They're just better at playing the game than we are because we are constantly digging our heels in and letting them win.

Pyhrric victories, sadly.

For them in 1964, or 1992 or 2008.

For us in 1980, 1994, or what looks like will happen in 2010.

Each one of those years marked, what was supposed to be, a "sea change" in American governance.

Each time, nothing much changed in the long run.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

It's interesting that I was perusing the comment section on an Infowars article about the health care penalties last week and this 16 year old kid asked the veterans on the board, "Why did you let the tyrannical government wrest control from the citizenry over the years? How could you let this happen?" The plea for an explanation penetrated my cranium like a diamond bullet.

We're all in one way or another, responsible for the maturation of the beast, and it brings a tear to my eye that these younger citizens must pay for our crimes. We have a moral obligation to look the beast in the eye and not blink. So no more backtracking and rationalizing unrealistic outcomes, it's time to organize and shove back if necessary.

As we are all members of His family, the cleansing blood of Christ that He shed for our sake knows no boundery and will soon heal the horrific loss caused by the sting of every arrow, sword, and bullet.

[AuH20]

Pyhrric victories, sadly.

For them in 1964, or 1992 or 2008.

For us in 1980, 1994, or what looks like will happen in 2010.

Each one of those years marked, what was supposed to be, a "sea change" in American governance.

Each time, nothing much changed in the long run.

1 step forward & 3 steps back. What did 1994 bring? Oh yea. NAFTA. ;)

[Anti Federalist]

1 step forward & 3 steps back. What did 1994 bring? Oh yea. NAFTA. ;)

In the end, does it really matter if it's the left boot or the right boot stamping your face?

[pcosmar]

Rex 84 , under Reagan.
:(

the base program for FEMA

[AuH20]

In the end, does it really matter if it's the left boot or the right boot stamping your face?

Modern-day political ideology is the preferred vessel for all megalomaniacs. That's why corporations have no qualms about backing seemingly socialist legislation, because in the end they will be licensed to dip their bill in the public trough as well. Remove all parameters of responsibility until the complicit masses are so entangled in the web of their own parasitic behavior, that they cannot wilfully keep out the large predators from the rapidly diminishing watering hole of federal funds (case in point, the bailouts).

[LibForestPaul]

peaceful revolution...
like Tiananmen Square
or tibet?


chop off the head, the body will die

[raiha]

n the end, does it really matter if it's the left boot or the right boot stamping your face?
I fear twill be both feet, AF

Well when she blows it'll be like nothing the world has ever seen...I predict we will all go mad en masse. Half of us will be killing, the other half, cowering...just like in the stone age.

What a piece of work is a man!

[Anti Federalist]

I fear twill be both feet, AF

Well when she blows it'll be like nothing the world has ever seen...I predict we will all go mad en masse. Half of us will be killing, the other half, cowering...just like in the stone age.

What a piece of work is a man!

I certainly hope not.

But if something isn't done soon, the "anthrax islands" of the world may end us all with a whimper and not a bang.

[Anti Federalist]

Still waiting for citations...

[Anti Federalist]

///

[Anti Federalist]

tick tock

[klamath]

The clock will keep ticking because that is not what this thread is about.

[pcosmar]

The clock will keep ticking because that is not what this thread is about.
No
but that was the accusation made.
:(

There is not going to be revolution in this country.
Peaceful or otherwise.

The government is at this moment gearing up for violence.
They are and will initiate it.
There will be chaos
There will be resistance.
No Revolution.

[Anti Federalist]

The clock will keep ticking because that is not what this thread is about.

I don't really care what you think this thread is about.

You made a statement that, (people here, on this board):


"[They] are salivating at the thought of seeing men and women die under their firepower"

This is damn near slander, and a goddamn dangerous accusation to be throwing around in the climate we are in right now. Maybe I'm wrong, but I felt that comment was directed, in an indirect way, at me.

I want citations of these statements. You need not bring others into it, just show where I have written that I am happy and salivating at thought of killing my fellow citizens.

If you cannot provide them, and I believe that you cannot, then I want a retraction of your statement.

[anaconda]

Revolution in America, what would it be like?
I have seen post after post about the glory of the American revolution and how man must fight for his freedom now against the terror of government.

The war Gods turn to us and ask. "Are you sure this is what you want? Do you know what you are asking? When you ask us to judge we will decide and there is no turning back. We have a fee we never waive, and that is blood of the innocent as well as the guilty." They know not what they ask for but so shall it be.

Revolution now would not have the king to rally against. A revolution now would not have the Union to rally against. If a revolution is small it will be crushed by the federal army. If it is large enough to challenge the government it will be many armies and many factions. Once the federal army is weakened the armies will turn against themselves. The Red guards from MA will take on the VT Patriot militia. The LA White knights and the Harlem Black Knights will engage in battle. States against states, groups against groups, individuals against individuals. Not just anarchists and libertarians have their goals for what the new America should look like. There are socialists, communists, Nazi, Zionists American Indians, etc etc that would see it as the opportunity to carve out their long dreamed of utopia. Now let's add in the foreign armies from those counties that don't have their own civil wars. The Chinese announce to the world that in order to stop the bloodshed in America they are deploying the 20 million man peoples army to install order. The Europeans ralley what is left of the UN and deploy a UN army under the same pretext. Will you be more free in the end? The war Gods will decide and you have no choice but bow your head and accept what they rule.

YouTube - The Green Fields Of France (or) Willie McBride-The Dropkick Murphys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UvQ52A7ksM)

Maybe the revolutionaries would not be so splintered as you suggest, but instead rally behind the U.S. Constitution. Beautiful song and video, by the way. WW1 was a real ugly affair. I have been trying to learn about WW1 lately.

[Kade]

Maybe the revolutionaries would not be so splintered as you suggest, but instead rally behind the U.S. Constitution.

And exactly who's interpretation?

[anaconda]

And exactly who's interpretation?


Jefferson?

By the way, we in the Ron Paul Revolution would never start such a mess. We are peaceful and yearn for due process in the constitutional republic. But I believe that if Federal thugs began to terrorize the citizens like S.S. Nazis, they might not bow down and accept this.

[Kade]

Jefferson?

By the way, we in the Ron Paul Revolution would never start such a mess. We are peaceful and yearn for due process in the constitutional republic. But I believe that if Federal thugs began to terrorize us like S.S. Nazis we would not bow down and accept this.

Some would disagree with Jefferson's interpretation of the Constitution... in fact many on this board that I could call out by name...

You happen to have chosen the one person I am well versed.

[pcosmar]

Some would disagree with Jefferson's interpretation of the Constitution... in fact many on this board that I could call out by name...

You happen to have chosen the one person I am well versed.

For what purpose.
Does this thread need derailing?
:(

[Kade]

For what purpose.
Does this thread need derailing?
:(

It doesn't.

I agree with the op fully.

[pcosmar]

We all have moments of anger that drives us to say violent things in passion. This thread is aimed at those that are getting caught up in the ranting of those members that are not just saying things in anger but plotting, premeditated with malice aforethought violence. They are salivating at the thought of seeing men and women die under their firepower all the while covering it with statements of "it is just in defence". It is called pump the troops up so they will commit horrible acts of violence all in the name of liberty. I have a number of these videos on my computer made of the Iraq war by guys I know. The words of these keyboard warriors are nearly the same only the country and targets are different.

This is slanderous.
I too would like a retraction and apology, Unless you have direct proof of these allegations.


...and the peaceful liberty movement will be weakened or destroyed by those the condone and advocate violent means. All peaceful liberty lovers will be smeared and weakened by attacks from the left and neocon right because of the actions of a violent few. When will people learn?

No, even if the peaceful liberty movement is successful, those in power WILL initiate violence to hold their power.
This will not end without violence.
Believing otherwise is delusional.

[Anti Federalist]

////

[Anti Federalist]

////

[cheapseats]

The lessons of history seem to suggest that empires are never overthrown by revolution. They collapse under their own weight or are overthrown by other empires. They may thrash around a bit before they accept the inevitable. But the leaders ultimately abdicate and flee.

The American Revolution didn't overthrow the British empire, indeed it barely scratched it. The combination of distance, expense, and bigger fish to fry caused the British to abandon the colonies.

By the time Rome was sacked, the Western empire was long dead from its own internal disease.

The Soviet Union was a much more tightly controlled and more brutal empire than the US and it dissolved with scarcely a shot being fired.

My prediciton - economic disaster, a traumatic weakening of the central government due to economic starvation, followed by a continuous stream of local aggitation and break aways, some that may be fought half-heartedly. But ultimately, the central government will consolidate in a MUCH smaller geographic znoe and let the rest go without a shot.


You'll concede, though, that at least SOME of your equanimity owes to WORKING FOR THE STATE, read that, FOR THE SYSTEM YOU CONTINUALLY DERIDE. Every two weeks that we limp along, thanks to a LABOR-INTENSIVE BUREAUCRACY THAT PERPETUATES ITSELF, it's another paycheck for you, at Taxpayer expense, yes?

Elsewhere, you magnanimously offer that "for a few pieces of silver," American Stragglers and Wanderers might avail themselves of the fruits of the nifty contraptions you have built with TAXPAYER FUNDS. Does FORTY pieces sound about right, on the silver?

And another thing, now that Arizona is broken out in Violence, might you re-think the ARROGANT assertion that "a few guys with rifles" suffices as adequate protection for Women? Or is Community Defense osan's department?

[Anti Federalist]

Still waiting, months later

[oyarde]

They have already been invited.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=403d90d6-7a61-41ac-8cef-902a1d14879d

Yes .

[oyarde]

I would think after the 2010 or 2012 elections; if things DC dont change its tune; then our economic collapse will bring violence on its on accord which will start the revolution/wars to begin. :(

Probably .

[klamath]

After lighting up a van in Iraq with innocent children inside a apache pilot says "You shouldn't bring children to war" when advised of the innocents targeted.

After hearing about a man killing a IRS agent in a random killing, a member on these forums states it is war. When asked if a IRS employee happened to bring his kids to work and were killed as well. "It would be the fathers fault!" is the reply.

[TNforPaul45]

I don't have access to the clapping Citzen Kane/Matt Collins gif right now, so I'll just say...

+1776

We r all in.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The road to freedom is paved with good actions.

Where do we go from here? How can we be free? One of the original posters is right, if we choose civil war, one way or the other, it will end with us losing. That's why they call it a new WORLD order. They rule here at home and abroad.

What if we choose the John Galt solution? It's tempting, but again, where would we go? Do you really think they would just let us quit? They would come for us eventually, and lock us up (or try) for non compliance.

It seems like, violence is the only solution we do NOT want, but it's the only goal in the collectivists mind, and it's the one solution we are guaranteed to lose at.

It would take a GLOBAL uprising, of all humanity at once, to clean out the system. This is nearly impossible...for now...indeed that may be the next big inflection point for our species. But wierdly, isn't a global population working in unison EXACTLY the definition of the collectivists dream? So oddly to defeat them we have to do exactly what they want, from a certain point of view.

No my friends, that path is the road to hell. The only path is the one of riding the bleeding edge of chaos, of mental revolution, and of changing minds. I think that Jesus saw all this coming (well, I'm sure he did, but....) and told us the solution: quiet resistance.

As captain Sheridan on Babylon 5 put it, "every time that i say no just one more time than you want me to say 'yes', I win!"

Our only weapon is "No." yes some will choose the sword, and God bless them they will have the right to do so. But that will not be the path to victory. Im just as upset as all of you are. I can see what is coming the same as all of you do. It frustrates the hell out of me. I don't like it. But this is a cancer that must burn itself out. And when our race finally grows up, we will go to the stars.

[Anti Federalist]

///

[Anti Federalist]

///

[Anti Federalist]

After lighting up a van in Iraq with innocent children inside a apache pilot says "You shouldn't bring children to war" when advised of the innocents targeted.

After hearing about a man killing a IRS agent in a random killing, a member on these forums states it is war. When asked if a IRS employee happened to bring his kids to work and were killed as well. "It would be the fathers fault!" is the reply.

Does not equal:


"[They] are salivating at the thought of seeing men and women die under their firepower"

:mad:

[Anti Federalist]

Our only weapon is "No." yes some will choose the sword, and God bless them they will have the right to do so. But that will not be the path to victory. Im just as upset as all of you are. I can see what is coming the same as all of you do. It frustrates the hell out of me. I don't like it. But this is a cancer that must burn itself out. And when our race finally grows up, we will go to the stars.

The "big" picture:

If we do not come to grips with this in within the next 20 years, the "powers that be" will simply exterminate us all with an engineered virus release or leave us caged in a grid that will leave freedom, liberty and privacy as dead as Julius Caesar.

We are bugs to them, a pestilence and they themselves are so world weary and jaded that they would welcome that conflagration even it consumed themselves.

And our epitaph won't be a voyage to the stars, it will be dust.

"No" triggers immediate pain compliance, in the near future it will trigger death and in the long term future the medical technology will be in place to make "no" cease to exist as an option.

[klamath]

Does not equal:



:mad:

worse

[sofia]

Violent few?
To who are you referring?

I know of none that even believe that revolution is possible.
I do however expect increased violence from the government forces and a likely collapse and breakdown of existing structure.

I am coming to believe that the Peaceful Revolution is delusional.
:(

Maybe if 2 million of us march on the Lincoln Memorial, holding hands and waving flags...the government will change its ways? :rolleyes:

[Anti Federalist]

worse

I fail to see how. Turning the government's nonsense back on them is one thing. Drooling over the prospect of getting to kill people is something entirely different.

Why not just admit that the people you directed your comment at, including myself, are NOT gibbering, salivating psychopaths, cackling in some pillbox, polishing a rifle and just waiting to blow somebody's head off?

We may disagree, but slander isn't needed.

[klamath]

I fail to see how. Turning the government's nonsense back on them is one thing. Drooling over the prospect of getting to kill people is something entirely different.

Why not just admit that the people you directed your comment at, including myself, are NOT gibbering, salivating psychopaths, cackling in some pillbox, polishing a rifle and just waiting to blow somebody's head off?

We may disagree, but slander isn't needed.

I fail to see how killing innocent children is turning the governments nonsense back on them.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

I fail to see how. Turning the government's nonsense back on them is one thing. Drooling over the prospect of getting to kill people is something entirely different.

Why not just admit that the people you directed your comment at, including myself, are NOT gibbering, salivating psychopaths, cackling in some pillbox, polishing a rifle and just waiting to blow somebody's head off?

We may disagree, but slander isn't needed.

If the SHTF and I was in your town, you would be one of the first people I networked with.

Premise #1
Nothing good comes from violence. Two evils do not make a good.

Premise #2
No one on this forum is in the majority making the decisions. It is not our policies that have wrecked the economy. It is not our policies that have created 15% + unemployment. It will not be our policies that brings the house of cards down.

The most anyone on this forum is going to do is react to a mess the majority of people have created

Premise #3
I do not have much confidence the majority of people referenced in premise #2 will pull their heads out of their butts in time to save anything. The historical record of human nature repeating itself does not paint a pretty picture.

Premise #4
Again looking to the historical record of repeating human nature I believe it will take a small group of principled people to stand up and say NO which will be the straw that breaks the camels back causing mass amounts of sheeple to follow. Unfortunately in many instances, history is not kind to people with balls but sometimes they get lucky.

Premise #5
A miracle of mass human enlightenment occurs where the human race figures out a better way.

[Anti Federalist]

If the SHTF and I was in your town, you would be one of the first people I networked with.

Same here, brother.

[TNforPaul45]

The "big" picture:

If we do not come to grips with this in within the next 20 years, the "powers that be" will simply exterminate us all with an engineered virus release or leave us caged in a grid that will leave freedom, liberty and privacy as dead as Julius Caesar.

We are bugs to them, a pestilence and they themselves are so world weary and jaded that they would welcome that conflagration even it consumed themselves.

And our epitaph won't be a voyage to the stars, it will be dust.

"No" triggers immediate pain compliance, in the near future it will trigger death and in the long term future the medical technology will be in place to make "no" cease to exist as an option.

Hey AF,

I do agree with you. I think the 20 years time frame is about right. I think though that we as a species will not be able to figure it out until they turn violent on us, which they will it's just a matter of time.

That is their trump card though. They can only play the mass extermination card once. Then that's it. And they won't get us all, and the rest will wake up I think at that point.

The very random mutations in our genes will be our last line of defense against any mass kill mechanisms. They won't get us all. Then it will be much easier to determine who they are.

Like I had said in my previous post, i think that we all can feel an inevitability, one way or the other, to how all of this will play out. The only variances I think are time frames. The actual battle will not be overcoming the totalitarians, but in ensuring that future human generations do not make the same mistakes that we have.

Although, figuring out a way to induce a feeling of ever vigilance forward 5 or 6 generations into the future, after we are free and have become complacent again, is a difficult problem to figure out.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Although, figuring out a way to induce a feeling of ever vigilance forward 5 or 6 generations into the future, after we are free and have become complacent again, is a difficult problem to figure out.

I doubt that could ever be accomplished. A good scenario would be create the most transparent and accurate historical record of events so future generations can discern truth for themselves.

[Anti Federalist]

Hey AF,

I do agree with you. I think the 20 years time frame is about right. I think though that we as a species will not be able to figure it out until they turn violent on us, which they will it's just a matter of time.

That is their trump card though. They can only play the mass extermination card once. Then that's it. And they won't get us all, and the rest will wake up I think at that point.

The very random mutations in our genes will be our last line of defense against any mass kill mechanisms. They won't get us all. Then it will be much easier to determine who they are.

Like I had said in my previous post, i think that we all can feel an inevitability, one way or the other, to how all of this will play out. The only variances I think are time frames. The actual battle will not be overcoming the totalitarians, but in ensuring that future human generations do not make the same mistakes that we have.

Although, figuring out a way to induce a feeling of ever vigilance forward 5 or 6 generations into the future, after we are free and have become complacent again, is a difficult problem to figure out.

All quite true.

As has been expressed many time before, discussing how and when to deal with the violence that is inevitably on it's way, and mount an effective fight against it is not salivating at the prospect of killing your fellow man.

But when the rubber meets the road and it's my wife or children or "them", or a situation where torture, reprogramming or death is the only option, then I'll fight, regardless of chances or what anybody says.

[Philhelm]

I, for one, believe that there is a time to draw swords. I don't believe that such a time is upon us, but there is a point at which a line is drawn.

[ninepointfive]

Klamath has good points, but when it comes down to it, a pacifist will die by the hand of his enemy.

[klamath]

Klamath has good points, but when it comes down to it, a pacifist will die by the hand of his enemy.
I am not a pacifist but I believe people around the world are far to ready to go to war. It is one thing to stand and defend your family but entirely another to advocate going to government offices and killing every man women and child that happens to be there.

[Anti Federalist]

I am not a pacifist but I believe people around the world are far to ready to go to war. It is one thing to stand and defend your family but entirely another to advocate going to government offices and killing every man women and child that happens to be there.

You keep saying that and I keep asking for a quote from anybody here that has said that.

Now I'm starting to think you might just be working for the Fibbies, trolling.