Kokesh: "I WILL BE HAPPY TO REFRAIN FROM CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE”

[LibertyEagle]

KOKESH RECEIVES SENTENCE FROM JUDGE: “I WILL BE HAPPY TO REFRAIN FROM CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE”


“I protest because I believe it is everyone’s right,” he said, standing next to his attorney. “I made an error in judgement. I am here because I take responsibility. I will be happy to refrain from civil disobedience.”


According to the Washington Post, Judge Patricia A. Broderick said she sentenced Kokesh to a year in jail, but suspended the jail time in favor of probation

more here... (http://benswann.com/kokesh-receives-sentence-from-judge-i-will-be-happy-to-refrain-from-civil-disobedience/)

[Anti Federalist]

And The System breaks another one.

Freedom.

[LibertyEagle]

If he gets his act together, he can do far more to advance liberty, being outside of jail, than inside.

[pcosmar]

And The System breaks another one.

Freedom.

Am hoping they are just empty words,, spoken for the sake of walking free a few more days,, and nothing more.

(called "Playing the Game")

[Anti Federalist]

Am hoping they are just empty words,, spoken for the sake of walking free a few more days,, and nothing more.

(called "Playing the Game")


“I protest because I believe it is everyone’s right,” he said, standing next to his attorney. “I made an error in judgement.."

Depending on how you want to view that phrase, it could be taken as a left handed smack.

But more than likely he's broken, he will retreat off somewhere to lick his wounds, get a "normal" job and keep his mouth shut, happy to stay out of the rape cage.

Can't say as I blame him one bit.

We don't deserve the likes of Adam K. any more than we deserve the likes of Ed Snowden.

Why risk your neck for people who don't give a shit, who want to be tyrannized, and hate you for trying to prevent that.

Congratulations, all you folks that wished Adam would just STFU and go away, you got your wish.

[cajuncocoa]

Depending on how you want to view that phrase, it could be taken as a left handed smack.

But more than likely he's broken, he will retreat off somewhere to lick his wounds, get a "normal" job and keep his mouth shut, happy to stay out of the rape cage.

Can't say as I blame him one bit.

We don't deserve the likes of Adam K. any more than we deserve the likes of Ed Snowden.

Why risk your neck for people who don't give a shit, who want to be tyrannized, and hate you for trying to prevent that.

Congratulations, all you folks that wished Adam would just STFU and go away, you got your wish.
Wish I could rep you again for this^^.

[AuH20]

Civil disobedience is useless. I'm glad Adam finally arrived at that conclusion. He should save his time and energy for the real fight.

[Travlyr]

Depending on how you want to view that phrase, it could be taken as a left handed smack.

But more than likely he's broken, he will retreat off somewhere to lick his wounds, get a "normal" job and keep his mouth shut, happy to stay out of the rape cage.

Can't say as I blame him one bit.

We don't deserve the likes of Adam K. any more than we deserve the likes of Ed Snowden.

Why risk your neck for people who don't give a shit, who want to be tyrannized, and hate you for trying to prevent that.

Congratulations, all you folks that wished Adam would just STFU and go away, you got your wish.

Adam was arrested for dancing and again arrested for chambering a rifle in Washington D.C. Those are courageous acts of peaceful civil disobedience. People say he should not have done that. They say Adam should have just sit down, shut up, and listened like we were all taught to do in government school. Adam paid a price for not obeying authority. How many good school children would have actually believed we live in a police state if Adam hadn't demonstrated it to us all? Adam is a complicated individual. I am too. I get some things right and some things wrong. I am proud of Adam for exposing the police state to us all. I doubt he is going to shut up. I expect better tactics in the future from Adam.

[pcosmar]

Civil disobedience is useless. I'm glad Adam finally arrived at that conclusion. He should save his time and energy for the real fight.

Adam Kokesh
Darn. Now I'll have to do something totally reckless and irresponsible: get elected to Congress.
https://www.facebook.com/ADAMVSTHEMAN


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EF6vS1i8kk#t=89

[brushfire]

And The System breaks another one.

Freedom.


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QB45mQLoj2w/UI3oKmZzkLI/AAAAAAAANgA/5dHm6upkwfU/s320/cool-hand-luke-3.jpg

[nayjevin]

Who is Adam Kokesh and why aren't we talking about Chris Christie.

[pcosmar]

Who is Adam Kokesh and why aren't we talking about Chris Christie.

you want fries with that?

[Deborah K]

"I will be happy to refrain from civil disobedience........for now.” ;)

[Deborah K]

Civil disobedience is useless. I'm glad Adam finally arrived at that conclusion. He should save his time and energy for the real fight.

Gandhi and MLK would have disagreed.

[AuH20]

Gandhi and MLK would have disagreed.

The hands of tyranny can only be forcibly removed. It's in the inherent nature of these people to dominate. They cannot be cured or rehabilitated from these pathological passions. That's the way the world works unfortunately.

[Christian Liberty]

Civil disobedience is useless. I'm glad Adam finally arrived at that conclusion. He should save his time and energy for the real fight.

What's the real fight? Politics?


Gandhi and MLK would have disagreed.

I hope civil disobedience is useful.

BTW: I believe that Adam's comment seemed like a left-handed smack.

[Occam's Banana]

The hands of tyranny can only be forcibly removed. It's in the inherent nature of these people to dominate. They cannot be cured or rehabilitated of these pathological passions. That's the way the world works unfortunately.

So then ... go forcibly remove some tyranny ... or STFU.
(Or are you waiting for someone else to do it for you?)

[AuH20]

What's the real fight? Politics?



Politics is a stageshow for the citizens projecting an illusion of control.

[Deborah K]

The hands of tyranny can only be forcibly removed. That's the way the world works unfortunately.

I haven't lost hope yet. Civil disobedience aids in changing hearts and minds as it did in Gandhi's and MLK's cases. As it's now doing in Snowden's case. You change enough hearts and minds, you can prevail. I don't believe violence is necessarily inevitable.

[purplechoe]

"I will be happy to refrain from civil disobedience........for now.” ;)

Yeah, I hope he doesn't stop although loading a shotgun in DC was a bit much, unless he's actually planning running for office. Can you imagine him in Congress or have as much exposure as Rand does being in the Senate? :)

[AuH20]

I haven't lost hope yet. Civil disobedience aids in changing hearts and minds as it did in Gandhi's and MLK's cases. As it's now doing in Snowden's case. You change enough hearts and minds, you can prevail. I don't believe violence is necessarily inevitable.

Look at TARP. A large plurality of Americans were firmly against it's passage. Winning hearts and minds doesn't mean anything. A determined minority willing to die for their principles is what matters. It happened during the American Revolution. You take what is yours and physically create change. The rest will fall in place.

[pcosmar]

I don't believe violence is necessarily inevitable.

Oh,, violence is inevitable.

the only question is,,
By Who?

[cajuncocoa]

Civil disobedience is useless. I'm glad Adam finally arrived at that conclusion. He should save his time and energy for the real fight.
Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes.

..

[Deborah K]

Look at TARP. A large plurality of Americans were firmly against it's passage. Winning hearts and minds don't mean anything. A determined minority is what matters. It happened in during the American Revolution. You take what is yours and create change.

Not just TARP. The political process is only one prong in the multi-pronged approach needed for change. I don't have a crystal ball, so I don't know how this is all going to go down - I have prepared for the worst-case scenario, but am also still educating and converting people, something we all need to constantly do. We stand a better chance in a worst case scenario with more - not less- people knowing wtf the government is trying to pull. Civil disobedience is another prong in that process. We all have our talents that we can put to use in various ways to effect change. We all need to have the courage of our convictions, and never give up, never lose hope. Never. No matter what. I have 2 daughters and sons-in-law and 5 grandchildren. I can't afford to give up.

[cajuncocoa]

Adam was arrested for dancing and again arrested for chambering a rifle in Washington D.C. Those are courageous acts of peaceful civil disobedience. People say he should not have done that. They say Adam should have just sit down, shut up, and listened like we were all taught to do in government school. Adam paid a price for not obeying authority. How many good school children would have actually believed we live in a police state if Adam hadn't demonstrated it to us all? Adam is a complicated individual. I am too. I get some things right and some things wrong. I am proud of Adam for exposing the police state to us all. I doubt he is going to shut up. I expect better tactics in the future from Adam.And don't forget to salute the Red, White & Blue ... and vote Republican! 'Murica....fuck yeah!

[tod evans]

I sincerely hope the peaceful protesters are successful, best of luck to the whole lot of 'em!


What I expect is the continued growth of the police state.....History repeats itself.


Look what happened after the Nam protests.........We're living it.:o

[Deborah K]

I sincerely hope the peaceful protesters are successful, best of luck to the whole lot of 'em!


What I expect is the continued growth of the police state.....History repeats itself.


Look what happened after the Nam protests.........We're living it.:o

Time will tell brutha...time will tell.

[Anti Federalist]

Look at TARP. A large plurality of Americans were firmly against it's passage. Winning hearts and minds doesn't mean anything. A determined minority willing to die for their principles is what matters. It happened during the American Revolution. You take what is yours and physically create change. The rest will fall in place.

Could not agree more.

Just a question of when and whom, now.

Right now, one side is scared and the other thankful for that.

The alternative is too dismal and grim to even think about.

[JK/SEA]

Oh,, violence is inevitable.

the only question is,,
By Who?


this way to the train>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[pcosmar]

this way to the train>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You know.. I have never resisted arrest.. and I have been arrested for some serious felonies.

I have never resisted arrest.

perhaps we see something new. ;)

[Christian Liberty]

The hands of tyranny can only be forcibly removed. It's in the inherent nature of these people to dominate. They cannot be cured or rehabilitated from these pathological passions. That's the way the world works unfortunately.

Unfortunately, you are probably right.

So then ... go forcibly remove some tyranny ... or STFU.
(Or are you waiting for someone else to do it for you?)

Its not so much "Someone else" as it is "A one man mission to bring down the regime is so unlikely to work as to have no chance of success."

I do wonder how revolting against a democratically elected government could work as well. Not because I think "democracy" has any inherent moral justification (it doesn't) but because I feel like "starting over" would likely lead to the same results in that event. I believe wholeheartedly in anarcho-capitalism but I don't think nearly enough people would currently accept it for it to be viable anywhere in the US.


I haven't lost hope yet. Civil disobedience aids in changing hearts and minds as it did in Gandhi's and MLK's cases. As it's now doing in Snowden's case. You change enough hearts and minds, you can prevail. I don't believe violence is necessarily inevitable.

I think its inevitable, but the civil disobedience might teach some people that the government goons are the bad guys. I'm not holding out hope, but might as well try.

..

I don't think Ron's neglecting to mention "violent revolution" necessarily means its off the table long term.


Could not agree more.

Just a question of when and whom, now.

Right now, one side is scared and the other thankful for that.

The alternative is too dismal and grim to even think about.


I am somewhat confused as to what you mean here.

[JK/SEA]

You know.. I have never resisted arrest.. and I have been arrested for some serious felonies.

I have never resisted arrest.

perhaps we see something new. ;)

i have this feeling we are already being led to the train....slowly, but surely.

[purplechoe]

Could not agree more.

Just a question of when and whom, now.

Right now, one side is scared and the other thankful for that.

The alternative is too dismal and grim to even think about.

I'll be right behind you Anti Federalist, lead the charge... ;)

Don't forget to give us a good fighting cry speech like Mel Gibson in Braveheart... :)

[tod evans]

i have this feeling we are already being led to the train....slowly, but surely.

I think they learned from the past, there won't be any "trains"........

However the walls that're being built, and the legislation passed, effectively make moving the masses unnecessary.

The lockdown drills, MRAPC's and black masked jackboots are pretty tell-tale..........

[MelissaWV]

...Its not so much "Someone else" as it is "A one man mission to bring down the regime is so unlikely to work as to have no chance of success."
...

In other words, many in this thread and other similar ones will happily join the revolt... as long as they have company, and others plan it.

In the meantime, those same people will not only not contribute to candidates who might temporarily make things slightly better (while they are deciding what kind of GMO-free gluten-free cage-free tacos to have at their revolution, you'd think they'd want a little less oppression), but they will bump useless threads and actively jump up and flail their arms in the faces of those trying to get things done via methods they deem to be too mainstream.

Bummer.

[tod evans]

In other words, many in this thread and other similar ones will happily join the revolt... as long as they have company, and others plan it.

In the meantime, those same people will not only not contribute to candidates who might temporarily make things slightly better (while they are deciding what kind of GMO-free gluten-free cage-free tacos to have at their revolution, you'd think they'd want a little less oppression), but they will bump useless threads and actively jump up and flail their arms in the faces of those trying to get things done via methods they deem to be too mainstream.

Bummer.

Do ya' mean those brave and heroic government employees really aren't fighting for my freedom for me?...:rolleyes:

[Carson]

"I will be happy to refrain from civil disobedience........for now.” ;)

Refraining is okay. Might not always be successful.

Sometimes perhaps disobedience is a duty.


I think the governor showed use one thing. Don't mess with traffic.

[Christian Liberty]

In other words, many in this thread and other similar ones will happily join the revolt... as long as they have company, and others plan it.

In the meantime, those same people will not only not contribute to candidates who might temporarily make things slightly better (while they are deciding what kind of GMO-free gluten-free cage-free tacos to have at their revolution, you'd think they'd want a little less oppression), but they will bump useless threads and actively jump up and flail their arms in the faces of those trying to get things done via methods they deem to be too mainstream.

Bummer.

I'm not sure what you are talking about.

[dannno]

Depending on how you want to view that phrase, it could be taken as a left handed smack.

But more than likely he's broken, he will retreat off somewhere to lick his wounds, get a "normal" job and keep his mouth shut, happy to stay out of the rape cage.

Can't say as I blame him one bit.

We don't deserve the likes of Adam K. any more than we deserve the likes of Ed Snowden.

Why risk your neck for people who don't give a shit, who want to be tyrannized, and hate you for trying to prevent that.

Congratulations, all you folks that wished Adam would just STFU and go away, you got your wish.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8MO7fkZc5o

[cajuncocoa]

In other words, many in this thread and other similar ones will happily join the revolt... as long as they have company, and others plan it.
Any meaningful revolt would necessarily need to be planned, and also would need to be an army > 1.
In the meantime, those same people will not only not contribute to candidates who might temporarily make things slightly better (while they are deciding what kind of GMO-free gluten-free cage-free tacos to have at their revolution, you'd think they'd want a little less oppression), but they will bump useless threads and actively jump up and flail their arms in the faces of those trying to get things done via methods they deem to be too mainstream.


Bummer.The process of "temporarily mak(ing) things slightly better" only serves to put Boobus deeper into his slumber....it decreases the urgency of action. Unless someone is willing to make things much more than "slightly" better, no....I won't contribute to their little game.

[MelissaWV]

Any meaningful revolt would necessarily need to be planned, and also would need to be an army > 1.The process of "temporarily mak(ing) things slightly better" only serves to put Boobus deeper into his slumber....it decreases the urgency of action. Unless someone is willing to make things much more than "slightly" better, no....I won't contribute to their little game.

So the alternatives are: violent revolution, but I have to wait for others to decide to want to join, propose a plan that I agree with, and swell to effective numbers (until that happens I'll just be a keyboard crusader); OR I can support a candidate, but only if they are going to wave a magic wand and fix everything at the same time. Weirdly, the standards for the former are totally different than the latter, because a violent revolution isn't going to fix everything at the same time.

In the meantime, I can always just sit here and tell everyone they're doing it wrong. That sounds awesome and highly effective. Pass the black cumin, let's mount up on our pooping boxes, and let everyone know how superior we are while simultaneously doing nothing that we tell others they should be doing.

Hooray?

[enoch150]

I will be happy to refrain from civil disobedience.

Lies.

What are the names of the people who stole Adam's money and things?

[cajuncocoa]

I don't think Ron's neglecting to mention "violent revolution" necessarily means its off the table long term.

I'm not going to try to extrapolate meaning that isn't explicitly said....but I've listened to and read the words of RP long enough to feel certain that he wouldn't advocate instigating violent revolution. That it might still be inevitable in the hands of others, and that we may need to join this revolution...well, that's a bridge we'll all have to cross when/if we come to it.

[cajuncocoa]

So the alternatives are: violent revolution, but I have to wait for others to decide to want to join, propose a plan that I agree with, and swell to effective numbers (until that happens I'll just be a keyboard crusader); OR I can support a candidate, but only if they are going to wave a magic wand and fix everything at the same time. Weirdly, the standards for the former are totally different than the latter, because a violent revolution isn't going to fix everything at the same time.

In the meantime, I can always just sit here and tell everyone they're doing it wrong. That sounds awesome and highly effective. Pass the black cumin, let's mount up on our pooping boxes, and let everyone know how superior we are while simultaneously doing nothing that we tell others they should be doing.

Hooray?
Each of us can do whatever it is that makes us feel productive, comfortable and happy. For me, it's not sending more money down a black hole, i.e., the hands of a candidate that will only "temporarily" and "slightly" make things better.

BTW, I am not advocating violent revolution....just want to clarify that. Peaceful civil disobedience, yes. Violent revolution, no.

[MelissaWV]

Each of us can do whatever it is that makes us feel productive, comfortable and happy. For me, it's not sending more money down a black hole, i.e., the hands of a candidate that will only "temporarily" and "slightly" make things better.

So you didn't contribute to anyone? That's fine then, but the original point was that people on here love to keyboard QB and talk about how you shouldn't donate to this or support that, and only violent revolution will solve anything. I've got my answer in this thread, at least, which is that there are only a few people who feel that way and they are waiting for more to feel that way before following them in a revolution (at which point I'm not sure it really qualifies as a revolt).

[compromise]

If he gets his act together, he can do far more to advance liberty, being outside of jail, than inside.

After all the shit he's pulled, no way. To be honest, the best route for him at this point is more disobedience because it's really the only thing he can do well.

[LibertyEagle]

After all the shit he's pulled, no way. To be honest, the best route for him at this point is more disobedience because it's really the only thing he can do well.

You think he can do more for liberty inside prison?

I think you should read again what I wrote.

[compromise]

You think he can do more for liberty inside prison?

I think you should read again what I wrote.

What do you see him doing? Becoming a CFL activist and hosting fundraisers for Rand? No way is that happening and I'm not sure if we should really want the guy who posts videos of himself smoking DMT on YouTube representing the liberty movement.

The best option for his career is continuing to attract attention through doing crazy shit. Sure, he might go to prison for a few short spells once in a while, but that will just help him attract more attention. He's a troll and that's his role in the movement.

[tod evans]

After all the shit he's pulled, no way. To be honest, the best route for him at this point is more disobedience because it's really the only thing he can do well.

Adam's a big boy and he's got the heavy weight of the federal jack-boots pressing down on his neck.

I'll not even suggest what route he should take, that's entirely up to him.

[jonhowe]

Depending on how you want to view that phrase, it could be taken as a left handed smack.

But more than likely he's broken, he will retreat off somewhere to lick his wounds, get a "normal" job and keep his mouth shut, happy to stay out of the rape cage.

Can't say as I blame him one bit.

We don't deserve the likes of Adam K. any more than we deserve the likes of Ed Snowden.

Why risk your neck for people who don't give a shit, who want to be tyrannized, and hate you for trying to prevent that.

Congratulations, all you folks that wished Adam would just STFU and go away, you got your wish.

Nah. He was just avoiding jail. He was at a rally on long island last night firey as ever. He's just not stupid; he lied to avoid jail. I fully support that.

[Occam's Banana]

Winning hearts and minds doesn't mean anything. A determined minority willing to die for their principles is what matters. It happened during the American Revolution. You take what is yours and physically create change. The rest will fall in place.

Every single thing you have said here is just flat-out wrong - especially with respect to the American Revolution.
The American Revolution did NOT just suddenly happen ex nihilo without any prior context or groundwork.
Nor will any future revolution - at least, not if such a revolution is to achieve anything worthwhile.


Winning hearts and minds doesn't mean anything.

Go tell it to folks like Sam Adams, the members of the various & numerous Committees of Correspondence, etc., who worked so hard to spread revolutionary sentiment & ideals. Tell it to all the colonists who, in the run-up to the American Revolution, assiduously read, distributed, discussed, promoted and (most importantly of all) took to heart the works & ideas of Thomas Paine, John Wilkes, Algernon Sydney, Voltaire, etc., etc., etc. The colonies were on fire with libertarian intellectual foment. But I'm sure that if you had explained it to them carefully, they would have seen the error of their ways and realized that what they were doing didn't "mean anything."

:rolleyes:


A determined minority willing to die for their principles is what matters.

The majority of colonists supported the revolution. The Tory loyalists were distinctly in the minority. This was precisely because of the efforts by Samuel Adams, the Corresponders, the boycotters, et al. when it came to "winning hearts and minds." (The common division of colonists into thirds - with one-third supporting revolution, one-third opposing, and one-third neutral - is erroneous. It is the result of a misinterpretation of something John Adams wrote in one of his letters.)


You take what is yours and physically create change. The rest will fall in place.

Without the intellectual & "spiritual" groundwork needed to shape attitudes & opinions and to guide & inform whatever follows (in the form of civil disobedience, among many other things), the only thing that will "fall in place" is yet another yoke on the necks of those who imagine that they can just suddenly & spontaneously rise up and "take what is theirs" without the necessary preparation of hearts and minds for revolution.


Civil disobedience is useless. I'm glad Adam finally arrived at that conclusion. He should save his time and energy for the real fight.

Civil disobedience is NOT useless. It is absolutely essential - especially at this point in time, when revolutionary sentiment is nearly at ebb tide. Again, if you don't agree, perhaps you should go explain it to the smugglers, boycotters & all the other non-violent reisisters in the colonies prior to the American Revolution. (The role of the non-violent implementation of the boycotts cannot be overestimated as a major factor - perhaps the major factor - in establishing & spreading revolutionary sentiment.) Such things had been percolating and seething in the colonies for many years - and necessarily so - before open, violent revolution ever came anywhere even close to being a real possibility.

But never mind all that. I'm sure they'd have been grateful if you had been around back then to inform them that they were just wasting their time & doing it wrong ...

[ObiRandKenobi]

i give him a pass for deceiving or lying to get around or out of the system.

say what you gotta say to get out.

[angelatc]

Civil disobedience is useless. I'm glad Adam finally arrived at that conclusion. He should save his time and energy for the real fight.


John Kerry - whatever happened to that guy?

[Anti Federalist]

Nah. He was just avoiding jail. He was at a rally on long island last night firey as ever. He's just not stupid; he lied to avoid jail. I fully support that.

Well good, that's good news.

I do too.

[Travlyr]

Well good, that's good news.

I do too.

I think you nailed it AF. "... it could be taken as a left handed smack."

[Anti Federalist]

I think you nailed it AF. "... it could be taken as a left handed smack."

That's sure how it sounded to me.

Idiot judge got "dissed" and didn't even know it.

Good for Adam!

[Travlyr]

That's sure how it sounded to me.

Idiot judge got "dissed" and didn't even know it.

Good for Adam!

A Federal Judge too you Anti-Federalist you.

[Anti Federalist]

A Federal Judge too you Anti-Federalist you.

LOL - That's right, it was a FedCoat judge.

Bonus!

[AuH20]

Could not agree more.

Just a question of when and whom, now.

Right now, one side is scared and the other thankful for that.

The alternative is too dismal and grim to even think about.

Most of us are dead but don't know it yet. The goal is to take as many with you on the ledger and make the tyrants rethink their course of action. Because I know for sure that they aren't willing to die for what they believe, as exhibited by their unhealthy obsession with transhumanism & life extension technologies. That's a certainty. When things get too hairy, they will be headed to the nearest airport. It will be a battle of wills with the payment being blood.

[cajuncocoa]

So you didn't contribute to anyone? That's fine then, but the original point was that people on here love to keyboard QB and talk about how you shouldn't donate to this or support that, and only violent revolution will solve anything. I've got my answer in this thread, at least, which is that there are only a few people who feel that way and they are waiting for more to feel that way before following them in a revolution (at which point I'm not sure it really qualifies as a revolt).
How did you reach the conclusion that I didn't contribute to anyone? That's not what I said. I have, when I deem the candidate worthy....I count Amash and Massie in that number. Not too many others.

[cajuncocoa]

John Kerry - whatever happened to that guy?
He helped end the Vietnam war....and then he joined the establishment that he railed against.

[Travlyr]

He helped end the Vietnam war....and then he joined the establishment that he railed against.

He married a rich girl.

[nbruno322]

Adam Kokesh should get himself a second passport and continue his activities outside of the United States.

http://www.internationalman.com/78-global-perspectives/1033-the-top-6-reasons-why-everyone-needs-a-second-passport

[klamath]

Figured I would stay out of this but with all the calls for violence I will just say, Adam called for a 1000-10,000 man loaded weapons march on Washington and I opposed it because of the high risk that out of the 10,000 someone might betray the case and cause a nonproductive bloodbath. Well it appears Adam's hand picked close circle of LTs betrayed, stole and threw him under the bus. I am really glad We really never saw the results of a random army drawn blindly from the streets of American marching with loaded weapons into the jaws of the tiger and the very eye of the media.......

[Travlyr]

He married a rich girl.

You see. That is what power does. The Empire corrupts. I have a bottle of John Kerry's Heinz Tomato Ketchup with Balsamic Vinegar in my refrigerator because I am a ketchup snob and like exotic ketchups. Yet, I did not realize that it has "High Fructose Corn Syrup" in it. If I would have understood before hand that the ketchup I bought was made from genetically modified organisms, then I mostly would not have bought it.

I think I will throw it in the woods.

[Travlyr]

Figured I would stay out of this but with all the calls for violence I will just say, Adam called for a 1000-10,000 man loaded weapons march on Washington and I opposed it because of the high risk that out of the 10,000 someone might betray the case and cause a nonproductive bloodbath. Well it appears Adam's hand picked close circle of LTs betrayed, stole and threw him under the bus. I am really glad We really never saw the results of a random army drawn blindly from the streets of American marching with loaded weapons into the jaws of the tiger and the very eye of the media.......

I sent him money for that march. Real money.

[nbruno322]

Adam Kokesh should get himself a second passport and continue his activities outside of the United States.

http://www.internationalman.com/78-global-perspectives/1033-the-top-6-reasons-why-everyone-needs-a-second-passport

Of course from a non-extradition treaty country or one that won't bow to DC's dictates.

[Pot Belly Pig]

Ending Tyranny without Violence
by Rothbard

Excerpt:

...This, then, becomes for La Boétie the central problem of political theory: why in the world do people consent to their own enslavement? La Boétie cuts to the heart of what is, or rather should be, the central problem of political philosophy: the mystery of civil obedience. Why do people, in all times and places, obey the commands of the government, which always constitutes a small minority of the society? To La Boétie the spectacle of general consent to despotism is puzzling and appalling:


I should like merely to understand how it happens that so many men, so many villages, so many cities, so many nations, sometimes suffer under a single tyrant who has no other power than the power they give him; who is able to harm them only to the extent to which they have the willingness to bear with him; who could do them absolutely no injury unless they preferred to put up with him rather than contradict him. Surely a striking situation! Yet it is so common that one must grieve the more and wonder the less at the spectacle of a million men serving in wretchedness, their necks under the yoke, not constrained by a greater multitude than they...



And this mass submission must be out of consent rather than simply out of fear:


Shall we call subjection to such a leader cowardice? ... If a hundred, if a thousand endure the caprice of a single man, should we not rather say that they lack not the courage but the desire to rise against him, and that such an attitude indicates indifference rather than cowardice? When not a hundred, not a thousand men, but a hundred provinces, a thousand cities, a million men, refuse to assail a single man from whom the kindest treatment received is the infliction of serfdom and slavery, what shall we call that? Is it cowardice? ... When a thousand, a million men, a thousand cities, fail to protect themselves against the domination of one man, this cannot be called cowardly, for cowardice does not sink to such a depth... What monstrous vice, then, is this which does not even deserve to be called cowardice, a vice for which no term can be found vile enough ... ?



It is evident from the above passages that La Boétie is bitterly opposed to tyranny and to the public's consent to its own subjection. He makes clear also that this opposition is grounded on a theory of natural law and a natural right to liberty. In childhood, presumably because the rational faculties are not yet developed, we obey our parents; but when grown, we should follow our own reason, as free individuals. As La Boétie puts it: "If we led our lives according to the ways intended by nature and the lessons taught by her, we should be intuitively obedient to our parents; later we should adopt reason as our guide and become slaves to nobody." Reason is our guide to the facts and laws of nature and to humanity's proper path, and each of us has "in our souls some native seed of reason, which, if nourished by good counsel and training, flowers into virtue, but which, on the other hand, if unable to resist the vices surrounding it, is stifled and blighted." And reason, La Boétie adds, teaches us the justice of equal liberty for all. For reason shows us that nature has, among other things, granted us the common gift of voice and speech. Therefore, "there can be no further doubt that we are all naturally free," and hence it cannot be asserted that "nature has placed some of us in slavery." Even animals, he points out, display a natural instinct to be free. But then, what in the world "has so, denatured man that he, the only creature really born to be free, lacks the memory of his original condition and the desire to return to it?"

La Boétie's celebrated and creatively original call for civil disobedience, for mass non-violent resistance as a method for the overthrow of tyranny, stems directly from the above two premises: the fact that all rule rests on the consent of the subject masses, and the great value of natural liberty. For if tyranny really rests on mass consent, then the obvious means for its overthrow is simply by mass withdrawal of that consent. The weight of tyranny would quickly and suddenly collapse under such a non-violent revolution. (The Tory David Hume did not, unsurprisingly, draw similar conclusions from his theory of mass consent as the basis of all governmental rule.)

Thus, after concluding that all tyranny rests on popular consent, La Boétie eloquently concludes that "obviously there is no need of fighting to overcome this single tyrant, for he is automatically defeated if the country refuses consent to its own enslavement." Tyrants need not be expropriated by force; they need only be deprived of the public's continuing supply of funds and resources. The more one yields to tyrants, La Boétie points out, the stronger and mightier they become. But if the tyrants "are simply not obeyed," they become "undone and as nothing." La Boétie then exhorts the "poor, wretched, and stupid peoples" to cast off their chains by refusing to supply the tyrant any further with the instruments of their own oppression. The tyrant, indeed, has nothing more than the power that you confer upon him to destroy you. Where has he acquired enough eyes to spy upon you, if you do not provide them yourselves? How can he have so many arms to beat you with, if he does not borrow them from you? The feet that trample down your cities, where does he get them if they are not your own? How does he have any power over you except through you? How would he dare assail you if he had not cooperation from you?

La Boétie concludes his exhortation by assuring the masses that to overthrow the tyrant they need not act, nor shed their blood. They can do so "merely by willing to be free." In short,


Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces.

[mac_hine]

I think they learned from the past, there won't be any "trains"........

However the walls that're being built, and the legislation passed, effectively make moving the masses unnecessary.

The lockdown drills, MRAPC's and black masked jackboots are pretty tell-tale..........

Panopticon....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVTKHI5ovyc

[klamath]

I sent him money for that march. Real money.I am sure his LTs enjoyed it.

[Travlyr]

I am sure his LTs enjoyed it.

I am confident that Adam did. You ... not so much.

[Deborah K]

Every single thing you have said here is just flat-out wrong - especially with respect to the American Revolution.
The American Revolution did NOT just suddenly happen ex nihilo without any prior context or groundwork.
Nor will any future revolution - at least, not if such a revolution is to achieve anything worthwhile.



Go tell it to folks like Sam Adams, the members of the various & numerous Committees of Correspondence, etc., who worked so hard to spread revolutionary sentiment & ideals. Tell it to all the colonists who, in the run-up to the American Revolution, assiduously read, distributed, discussed, promoted and (most importantly of all) took to heart the works & ideas of Thomas Paine, John Wilkes, Algernon Sydney, Voltaire, etc., etc., etc. The colonies were on fire with libertarian intellectual foment. But I'm sure that if you had explained it to them carefully, they would have seen the error of their ways and realized that what they were doing didn't "mean anything."

:rolleyes:



The majority of colonists supported the revolution. The Tory loyalists were distinctly in the minority. This was precisely because of the efforts by Adams, the Correpsonders, the boycotters, et al. when it came to "winning hearts and minds." (The common division of colonists into thirds - with one-third supporting revolution, one-third opposing, and one-third neutral - is erroneous. It is the result of a misinterpretation of something John Adams wrote in one of his letters.)



Without the intellectual & "spiritual" groundwork needed to shape attitudes & opinions and to guide & inform whatever follows (in the form of civil disobedience, among many other things), the only thing that will "fall in place" is yet another yoke on the necks of those who imagine that they can just suddenly & spontaneously rise up and "take what is theirs" without the necessary preparation of hearts and minds for revolution.



Civil disobedience is NOT useless. It is absolutely essential - especially at this point in time, when revolutionary sentiment is nearly at ebb tide. Again, if you don't agree, perhaps you should go explain it to the smugglers, boycotters & all the other non-violent reisisters in the colonies prior to the American Revolution. (The role of the non-violent implementation of the boycotts cannot be overestimated as a major factor - perhaps the major factor - in establishing & spreading revolutionary sentiment.) Such things had been percolating and seething in the colonies for many years - and necessarily so - before open, violent revolution ever came anywhere even close to being a real possibility.

But never mind all that. I'm sure they'd have been grateful if you had been around back then to inform them that they were just wasting their time & doing it wrong ...

http://i44.tinypic.com/qqwol1.jpg

Someone give Banana some rep for me please. I'm out.

[MelissaWV]

How did you reach the conclusion that I didn't contribute to anyone? That's not what I said. I have, when I deem the candidate worthy....I count Amash and Massie in that number. Not too many others.

I reached that conclusion because you said you would not contribute to those who could make only slight changes. Any individual politician or statesman is by definition only going to be able to make slight ones. Very slight, and often temporary, as the next group often overturns a number of positives from the previous group.

[pcosmar]

and I opposed it because of the high risk that out of the 10,000 someone might betray the case and cause a nonproductive bloodbath.

LOL..
I had no such fear.. But had that unlikely scenario unfolded,,, there would be a whole lot less of the King enforcers.. And that would be quite productive.

[LibertyEagle]

LOL..
I had no such fear.. But had that unlikely scenario unfolded,,, there would be a whole lot less of the King enforcers.. And that would be quite productive.

And it would have attracted many to their cause (the government). We would not have come out the winner in something like that, in no way, shape, or form.

[pcosmar]

And it would have attracted many to their cause (the government). We would not have come out the winner in something like that, in no way, shape, or form.

50/50 chance of it going the other way,, as the country sees the government attack a group of "heroes". (Veterans)

Might just of had a snowball effect across the country..

but both scenarios are speculation.

[LibertyEagle]

50/50 chance of it going the other way,, as the country sees the government attack a group of "heroes". (Veterans)

Might just of had a snowball effect across the country..

but both scenarios are speculation.

He wasn't just inviting veterans to that thing. It was an accident waiting to happen. Not wise at all.

“Every battle is won before it’s ever fought.” ― Sun Tzu

[phill4paul]

He wasn't just inviting veterans to that thing. It was an accident waiting to happen. Not wise at all.

“Every battle is won before it’s ever fought.” ― Sun Tzu

Sounds like anti-gun fear mongering propaganda to me. Can't trust vets and citizens with them darn guns. Just an accident waiting to happen.

[tod evans]

He wasn't just inviting veterans to that thing. It was an accident waiting to happen. Not wise at all.

“Every battle is won before it’s ever fought.” ― Sun Tzu

There will be a spark at some point, whether Adam fuels or fans the flame remains to be seen......

Hell he might even be the spark...

[Christian Liberty]

I'm not going to try to extrapolate meaning that isn't explicitly said....but I've listened to and read the words of RP long enough to feel certain that he wouldn't advocate instigating violent revolution. That it might still be inevitable in the hands of others, and that we may need to join this revolution...well, that's a bridge we'll all have to cross when/if we come to it.

I'm not totally sure what counts as "inevitable" but if Ron is somebody who would take violence completely off the table, I don't agree with him. I believe that aggressive violence is always immoral but that protecting yourself against tyrants is not. That includes either defending yourself from an act of aggression by the tyrants, or removing a person who has already committed said act of aggression. Now, obviously, due to pragmatic concerns, to exercise such a right should always be a last resort. When the "last resort" is for a given person could vary, but I agree it shouldn't be taken lightly. I do not agree that it shouldn't be considered.


Every single thing you have said here is just flat-out wrong - especially with respect to the American Revolution.
The American Revolution did NOT just suddenly happen ex nihilo without any prior context or groundwork.
Nor will any future revolution - at least, not if such a revolution is to achieve anything worthwhile.



Go tell it to folks like Sam Adams, the members of the various & numerous Committees of Correspondence, etc., who worked so hard to spread revolutionary sentiment & ideals. Tell it to all the colonists who, in the run-up to the American Revolution, assiduously read, distributed, discussed, promoted and (most importantly of all) took to heart the works & ideas of Thomas Paine, John Wilkes, Algernon Sydney, Voltaire, etc., etc., etc. The colonies were on fire with libertarian intellectual foment. But I'm sure that if you had explained it to them carefully, they would have seen the error of their ways and realized that what they were doing didn't "mean anything."

:rolleyes:



The majority of colonists supported the revolution. The Tory loyalists were distinctly in the minority. This was precisely because of the efforts by Adams, the Corresponders, the boycotters, et al. when it came to "winning hearts and minds." (The common division of colonists into thirds - with one-third supporting revolution, one-third opposing, and one-third neutral - is erroneous. It is the result of a misinterpretation of something John Adams wrote in one of his letters.)



Without the intellectual & "spiritual" groundwork needed to shape attitudes & opinions and to guide & inform whatever follows (in the form of civil disobedience, among many other things), the only thing that will "fall in place" is yet another yoke on the necks of those who imagine that they can just suddenly & spontaneously rise up and "take what is theirs" without the necessary preparation of hearts and minds for revolution.



Civil disobedience is NOT useless. It is absolutely essential - especially at this point in time, when revolutionary sentiment is nearly at ebb tide. Again, if you don't agree, perhaps you should go explain it to the smugglers, boycotters & all the other non-violent reisisters in the colonies prior to the American Revolution. (The role of the non-violent implementation of the boycotts cannot be overestimated as a major factor - perhaps the major factor - in establishing & spreading revolutionary sentiment.) Such things had been percolating and seething in the colonies for many years - and necessarily so - before open, violent revolution ever came anywhere even close to being a real possibility.

But never mind all that. I'm sure they'd have been grateful if you had been around back then to inform them that they were just wasting their time & doing it wrong ...

Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by "ebb tide"? And regarding John Adams' letters, what exactly was misinterpreted?

All that said, I agree with what you're saying here. But ultimately, if violent revolution (Or more accurately, secession) is to be entirely taken off the table, I think the impact is lost.


How did you reach the conclusion that I didn't contribute to anyone? That's not what I said. I have, when I deem the candidate worthy....I count Amash and Massie in that number. Not too many others.

Agreed.

[Deborah K]

After all the shit he's pulled, no way. To be honest, the best route for him at this point is more disobedience because it's really the only thing he can do well.

Bullshit! Adam is a great speechwriter and speaker. His interviews and activism at airports regarding TSA were awe inspiring. He's done some dumb shit no doubt, but he's got a brilliant mind. He's young and impetuous, I'll cut him some slack. He's still evolving. He doesn't want to be anybody's leader, or any movement's representative. How many different ways does he have to proclaim that, before people stop trying to pigeon-hole him and then turn around and accuse him of not representing the movement well?

I've known Adam since before anyone ever heard of him. When I was organizing Revolution March I was looking for someone from the Iraq Veterans Against the War to speak at the event. Adam contacted me about it. I vetted him and then agreed. We had many long conversations, and when he read his now famous speech to me to get my approval, I got chills because I knew this kid was meant for something more.

Adam is smart. He lost his way. He's getting back on track. And the bottom line is, he wants us to be free. That is the truth - regardless of what his enemies say. I have enemies too. And if you're someone who sticks your neck out for the cause, you have them too.

[Christian Liberty]

50/50 chance of it going the other way,, as the country sees the government attack a group of "heroes". (Veterans)

Would that actually be winning; though? We'd still have the same government-worker worship issue.

[Deborah K]

But ultimately, if violent revolution (Or more accurately, secession) is to be entirely taken off the table, I think the impact is lost.


Who here is arguing that violence should be entirely taken off the table? The argument is over whether it is inevitable. Some here actually seem to want it. Some believe it's the only way anything will get better. And some, like myself, are preparing for it, but intend for it to be in self-defense, not initiated.

[Christian Liberty]

Who here is arguing that violence should be entirely taken off the table?

Nobody actually said it. Cajun implied it, which is what I replied too.



The argument is over whether it is inevitable. Some here actually seem to want it. Some believe it's the only way anything will get better. And some, like myself, are preparing for it, but intend for it to be in self-defense, not initiated.

Obviously it shouldn't be initiated. That's a given. The real question is, how much do you let them aggress against you before you fight back?

I'm firmly in the camp of "Feeling like its the only way anything will get better." I don't want it, but I think its unavoidable. The only question is, how long will it take? The answer to that question is directly related to how much tyranny we're willing to tolerate, because the tyrants are not going to stop on their own.

Its easier said than done, but if the liberty movement as a group drew the line in the same place, we'd be more effective.

[Deborah K]

Nobody actually said it. Cajun implied it, which is what I replied too.



Obviously it shouldn't be initiated. That's a given. The real question is, how much do you let them aggress against you before you fight back?

I'm firmly in the camp of "Feeling like its the only way anything will get better." I don't want it, but I think its unavoidable. The only question is, how long will it take? The answer to that question is directly related to how much tyranny we're willing to tolerate, because the tyrants are not going to stop on their own.

Its easier said than done, but if the liberty movement as a group drew the line in the same place, we'd be more effective.

Gonna answer this tomorrow. Gonna snuggle with hubby right now.

[Occam's Banana]

Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by "ebb tide"?

"ebb tide" = "at a low point"

IOW: When I said, "revolutionary sentiment is nearly at ebb tide," I meant that there is currently very little support for revolution in America today (especially as compared to the late colonial period prior to the War for American Independence).


All that said, I agree with what you're saying here. But ultimately, if violent revolution (Or more accurately, secession) is to be entirely taken off the table, I think the impact is lost.

I didn't say anything about taking violent revolution off the table. I pointed out that in order for any violent revolution to succeed & endure, it must be founded upon & preceded by some necessary groundwork. That groundwork can only be laid by things such as civil disobedience, non-violent resistance, winning hearts & minds, etc.

My point is that AuH20 is spouting utter nonsense when he claimed otherwise - especially when he cited the American Revolution as an example.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I don't know this guy personally or the way some here know him, but people are seriously being critical of him?! I'd say this man deserves a lot of thanks. If you're a family man, then be glad that there are young, unmarried guys without kids who are willing to do this stuff. People who talk about supporting the troops have that game down pat, but people in the liberty movement can't even keep their mouth shut. They cast out somebody who is actually doing something. They actually sound like the average American boob.

Maybe it's just that people want to be on the winning side. Those are probably the same kind of people who criticized Rosa Parks and that losing her job was her own doing. Parks and other people like her are eventually vindicated. The doubters then come out of the woodwork because the act that was so reckless yesterday is so cool today.

[Occam's Banana]

And regarding John Adams' letters, what exactly was misinterpreted?

In a letter he wrote in 1815, John Adams speculated that one-third of Americans were in favor of the Revolution, one-third were opposed to it, and one-third were neutral. However, Adams was referring to American attitudes towards the French Revolution - NOT the American Revolution.

FTA: http://allthingsliberty.com/2013/02/john-adamss-rule-of-thirds/

Dear Mr. History:

I often hear that John Adams estimated that one-third of Americans supported the Revolution, one-third opposed it, and one-third was neutral. That doesn’t seem right to me. Does that mean that the Loyalist and Patriot efforts were about equal? Was Adams correct in this? Sincerely, One-third Skeptical

Dear One-Third:

Don’t hang your tri-cornered hat on those percentages. This famous quote comes from a letter Adams wrote in 1815 to Massachusetts Senator James Lloyd, saying "I should say that full one third were averse to the revolution ... An opposite third … gave themselves up to an enthusiastic gratitude to France. The middle third, … always averse to war, were rather lukewarm both to England and France; ..." Truth is, Adams was not addressing America’s rebellion – he was writing about American attitudes towards the French Revolution, when Americans grappled with either supporting France or maintaining commercial ties with Britain. The mistake appears to stem from historian Sydney George Fisher, who misinterpreted Adams’s meaning in his 1908 book, The Struggle for American Independence, Volume I. Others, reading the quote without the full context of Adams’s letter, have repeated the error ever since. In Fisher’s defense, it is easy to get the context of the passage wrong because it’s buried in the middle of a somewhat windy paragraph that jumps around with references to multiple topics, years, and other correspondence. And that paragraph is buried in the middle of a somewhat windy letter (at 2,105 words) which also jumps around with references to multiple topics, years, and other correspondence. Fisher may have missed the point because he got tired of looking for it.

[... see the article for a further discussion of the proportion of American revolutionaries vs. Tory loyalists ...]

[Christian Liberty]

I always thought the same thing was true, and that's actually rather sad, because I was under the impression that a revolution actually succeeded with roughly 33% support (probably more than the liberty movement will ever have.) Alas, it was not.

[Occam's Banana]

I always thought the same thing was true, and that's actually rather sad, because I was under the impression that a revolution actually succeeded with roughly 33% support (probably more than the liberty movement will ever have.) Alas, it was not.

I know what you mean. I was disappointed when I learned the truth, too. But it makes sense. As Murray Rothbard drives home in Conceived in Liberty, insurgent revolutions absolutely require the support of the bulk of the populace if they are to succeed. That's why winning hearts and minds is so very important.

Those who romantically imagine that "a determined minority willing to die for their principles is what matters" are (unfortunately) full of crap - at least when it comes to open & violent rebellion.

[Anti Federalist]

http://i44.tinypic.com/qqwol1.jpg

Someone give Banana some rep for me please. I'm out.

I'll be happy to, even though we are in disagreement here.

[Christian Liberty]

I'll be happy to, even though we are in disagreement here.

Why is he wrong?

[RickyJ]

I get it, he isn't going to do any more civil disobedience, he is going to start doing uncivil disobedience. J/K

Talk is good, but if all we ever do is talk, what will ever change?

[Anti Federalist]

Why is he wrong?

It's not that he's wrong, exactly, it's just that we differ on what level of public support is needed and how much was there during the revolution.

The fact is that most of the colonies and their populations did not support Independence, even up until 1776.

They thought the men from Boston were nothing but a bunch of wild eyed rabble rousers.

[RickyJ]

The hands of tyranny can only be forcibly removed. It's in the inherent nature of these people to dominate. They cannot be cured or rehabilitated from these pathological passions. That's the way the world works unfortunately.

That is indeed the way this wicked world works. You can't change a corrupt system from within the corrupt system. Change has to come from outside the system. The system has to be utterly crushed before a new system can be established. That isn't what most people want to hear, but it is unfortunately the truth.

[RickyJ]

So then ... go forcibly remove some tyranny ... or STFU.
(Or are you waiting for someone else to do it for you?)

Typical response from someone that doesn't like what they are hearing even though it is a fact that has all of human history to back it up.

[Occam's Banana]

Typical response from someone that doesn't like what they are hearing even though it is a fact that has all of human history to back it up.

Typical response from someone who doesn't pay any attention to what other people actually say.
So ... you run along now and go kill some tyrants with AuH20 and then get back to us. We'll wait ...

[Christian Liberty]

It's not that he's wrong, exactly, it's just that we differ on what level of public support is needed and how much was there during the revolution.

The fact is that most of the colonies and their populations did not support Independence, even up until 1776.

They thought the men from Boston were nothing but a bunch of wild eyed rabble rousers.

Hmm... I'd be curious to see some hard stats on this, if possible. I respect both of you a lot and you're citing different statistics here. I have no idea who's right. I generally consider myself pretty good at history (Not compared to the people here, mind you) and I believed the "one-third" statistic until OB discredited it.

[Pot Belly Pig]

http://i44.tinypic.com/qqwol1.jpg

Someone give Banana some rep for me please. I'm out.

If I could I would. He is definitely the shit when it comes to debating on this site. I noticed he got no response from his victim, though the guy responded later to something else. Priceless!

[Christian Liberty]

Typical response from someone who doesn't pay any attention to what other people actually say.
So ... you run along now and go kill some tyrants with AuH20 and then get back to us. We'll wait ...

I don't think AuH20 was saying that we were ready to fight now

[AuH20]

That is indeed the way this wicked world works. You can't change a corrupt system from within the corrupt system. Change has to come from outside the system. The system has to be utterly crushed before a new system can be established. That isn't what most people want to hear, but it is unfortunately the truth.

Nothing says "DEFIANCE" like dancing at the Jefferson Memorial or applying for a street permit to conduct a "demonstration." Acts of civil disobedience, especially those seen in the modern setting are nothing more than feel good acts that do little beyond augmenting the confidence of the participants. Why do you think Obama's then chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel was quoted with saying that the first amendment was terribly overrated? Because such protests and expression pose no true threat to them. You hurt these people by destroying their institutions and make them fearful of going out in public. The Sons of Liberty employed such tactics to remarkable effect leading up to the colonial war.

[AuH20]

I don't think AuH20 was saying that we were ready to fight now

There hasn't been an seminal event set forth to mobilize an appropriate reaction. Many are on pins and needles, but the need has not arisen.

[LibertyEagle]

That is indeed the way this wicked world works. You can't change a corrupt system from within the corrupt system. Change has to come from outside the system. The system has to be utterly crushed before a new system can be established. That isn't what most people want to hear, but it is unfortunately the truth.

The Communists would agree with you. However, I'm not wanting to crush our form of government. I just want to put it back within its constitutional boundaries. Because you see, I don't particularly trust anyone living today to put in place a new system. Not even people from this "movement".

[Anti Federalist]

Hmm... I'd be curious to see some hard stats on this, if possible. I respect both of you a lot and you're citing different statistics here. I have no idea who's right. I generally consider myself pretty good at history (Not compared to the people here, mind you) and I believed the "one-third" statistic until OB discredited it.

Yeah, so did I for a long time as well, although, to be honest, I'd say it was probably somewhere in that neighborhood.

Now, OB is certainly correct in saying that the CoC, the acts of civil disobedience in Boston, the general attitude, or hell, look at the success of "Common Sense", that all these things laid the groundwork for revolution.

[AuH20]

Remember this quote. This lets you into the mind of the elite:

http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quote-let-them-march-all-they-want-as-long-as-they-continue-to-pay-their-taxes-alexander-haig-77622.jpg

They sit around and laugh when they see some of these stunts.

[Christian Liberty]

The Communists would agree with you. However, I'm not wanting to crush our form of government. I just want to put it back within its constitutional boundaries. Because you see, I don't particularly trust anyone living today to put in place a new system. Not even people from this "movement".

The constitutional republic might as well be a new system at this point. Its not like that system still really exists. I mean, do you see any constitutional government going on in this country right now? I don't.

My ideal remains an absolute abolition of the State, but going back to what our Founders intended would be far closer to where I want to get than where we are right now. I also recognize that nothing is perfect. As the Declaration says, force is not rightly used for light or transient causes.

But when a long train of abuses....

[Christian Liberty]

Yeah, so did I for a long time as well, although, to be honest, I'd say it was probably somewhere in that neighborhood.

Now, OB is certainly correct in saying that the CoC, the acts of civil disobedience in Boston, the general attitude, or hell, look at the success of "Common Sense", that all these things laid the groundwork for revolution.

We need to lay the groundwork now, regardless of whether this government can truly be changed peacefully or not (I don't think it can be, but I guess we'll find out when the time comes. The time, unfortunately, is not now, if for no other reason than the fact that probably less than 10% even see America as tyrannical.)

Unfortunately, its tough when most people would rather talk about something else and view me as a politics fanatic when I try to bring it into conversations.

[fr33]

In other words, many in this thread and other similar ones will happily join the revolt... as long as they have company, and others plan it.

In the meantime, those same people will not only not contribute to candidates who might temporarily make things slightly better (while they are deciding what kind of GMO-free gluten-free cage-free tacos to have at their revolution, you'd think they'd want a little less oppression), but they will bump useless threads and actively jump up and flail their arms in the faces of those trying to get things done via methods they deem to be too mainstream.

Bummer.
Well it goes both ways. Activists get criticized by the politicians amongst us at every turn too. Neither group has accomplished anything to speak of other than getting attention. That's all people like Kokesh and Ron Paul have done so far; get attention.

Of course you've made a generalization like we all do and generalizations always have exceptions. There was the guy in Cali that started shooting TSA workers. He didn't wait for company and unfortunately nobody had his back. There are other examples like that.

[Occam's Banana]

It's not that he's wrong, exactly, it's just that we differ on what level of public support is needed and how much was there during the revolution.

The fact is that most of the colonies and their populations did not support Independence, even up until 1776.

They thought the men from Boston were nothing but a bunch of wild eyed rabble rousers.

Hmm... I'd be curious to see some hard stats on this, if possible. I respect both of you a lot and you're citing different statistics here. I have no idea who's right. I generally consider myself pretty good at history (Not compared to the people here, mind you) and I believed the "one-third" statistic until OB discredited it.

I don't think it's so much of an "I'm right and AF is wrong" (or vice versa) kind of thing as it is a matter of a difference in perspective. (AF is saying an elephant is like a tree, and I am saying an elephant is like a rope.) For example, it is true that many thought the Bostonians had indeed gone off their nut - but those "many" were primarily conservative oligarchs (and their attendant hangers-on) who desired preservation of the status quo ante. Because of their positions of power and influence (in venues such as the colonial assemblies, for example), they were able to exercise a restraining influence on radical sentiment greatly out of proportion to their actual numbers.

In spite of this, an even greater part of the general population (artisans, farmers & "common folk") were becoming increasingly radicalized - especially after Lexington & Concord. (Upon those momentous events, they flocked to the banner - as a result, Boston was spontaneously invested by tens of thousands of militiamen who had come from Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire & elsewhere after hearing news of the "shot heard 'round the world.")

AF is also correct that there was staunch opposition in the colonial assemblies to declaring outright independence - even as late as 1776. Again, this opposition was comprised primarily of connected & influential "pro-establishment" reactionaries with vested interests. But despite this, the colonies did, in fact, declare independence - precisely because popular pro-independence sentiment was the stronger force in the end.

Revolutions are extremely dynamic things. There was never just one, single static level of "pro-independence" sentiment. Events can galvanize & change matters significantly (and sometimes seemingly "overnight"). But in the end, revolutionary insurgencies such as the American Revolution cannot succeed unless they enjoy the support of the bulk of the populace. Reactionary elites are only able to do so much in the face of popular resistance.

Of course, none of this is to say that everyone who (eventually) supported the Revolution were radical libertarian types like Samuel Adams. Especially among the conservatives, there were reactionaries who eventually resigned themselves to separation from Britain and joined the independence movement - and then proceded to do all that they could to ensure that independent America would preserve their oligarchic status & priveleges.

To summarize: I should not be understood as saying or implying there was a steady, homogeneous & high-level of support for independence throughout the revolutionary period. But there did come to be a preponderance of support for independence among the general population - otherwise, the Revolution could not possibly have succeeded.

Unfortunately, I just don't see that kind of thing happening again in America - at least, not on a nationwide scale. If it happens at all, I think it will require some momentous event (ala the collapse of Communism in the Soviet Union) combined with popularly supported local & regional separatist movements. (What the nature & character of those movements might be under such circumstances is another matter altogether - sadly, "separatist" does not mean "pro-liberty" ...)

[Teenager For Ron Paul]

This is what I thought of.

"I will be happy to refrain from civil disobedience."

Ergo,

I will proceed to uncivil disobedience.

[Occam's Banana]

I don't think AuH20 was saying that we were ready to fight now

He wasn't. But he was saying that "winning hearts & minds" (and other things like civil disobedience) is "useless" - and that things would just magically "fall into place" after a "determined minority willing to die for their principles" throw themselves upon the swords of their enemies.

Thus, I am suggesting that he & others who agree with him do just that - and see just how it works out for them when the house of their revolution is erected without the necessary foundations.

[Occam's Banana]

Why do you think Obama's then chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel was quoted with saying that the first amendment was terribly overrated? Because such protests and expression pose no true threat to them.


Remember this quote. This lets you into the mind of the elite:

["Let them march all they want, as long as they continue to pay their taxes." - Alexander Haig]

They sit around and laugh when they see some of these stunts.

That is because they are smug fools who cannot sense the ground slowly but surely shifting beneath their feet.

Revolutions are not made overnight - and as little as it may be, people like Adam Kokesh are doing more by dancing at the Jefferson Memorial than you are by grousing about them doing so.

[Pot Belly Pig]

That is because they are smug fools who cannot sense the ground slowly but surely shifting beneath their feet.

Revolutions are not made overnight, and people like Adam Kokesh are doing far more by dancing at the Jefferson Memorial than you are by grousing about it.

Kokesh is doing a-okay from this all. He's been on Drudge I think three times, his Youtube account has shot up to nearly 100K subscribers, and he's headed to LA to relaunch a bigger and badder AVTM.

Adam > all the piss-bag haters put together.

[speciallyblend]

Adam Kokesh I trust, sadly I cannot trust rons son!

[LibertyEagle]

Adam Kokesh I trust, sadly I cannot trust rons son!

Yeah, if Rand only made videos about how to get high with DMT, then you'd trust him.

[enoch150]

Hmm... I'd be curious to see some hard stats on this, if possible. I respect both of you a lot and you're citing different statistics here. I have no idea who's right. I generally consider myself pretty good at history (Not compared to the people here, mind you) and I believed the "one-third" statistic until OB discredited it.

In 2000 historian Robert Calhoon said the consensus of historians is...

40% - 45% Patriots
15% - 20% Loyalists
35% - 45% neutral

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_(American_Revolution)#Influence

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Remember this quote. This lets you into the mind of the elite:

http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quote-let-them-march-all-they-want-as-long-as-they-continue-to-pay-their-taxes-alexander-haig-77622.jpg

They sit around and laugh when they see some of these stunts.


Perhaps, but I have to wonder if people are paying less taxes today. Could be wrong, but I'd guess there are more contract workers and under-the-table workers these days who are not paying up. If so, then it might be due to a backlash against things like Obama phones and drug war funding.

Al Haig was also a shrewd politician. If he had made his flippant remark in another time and place, then maybe he loses his head. Not sure when he made that comment, but some protesting definitely has impact. The issues with today's million man/mom/whatever marches is marketing, dilution, spinning, and other things.





Yeah, if Rand only made videos about how to get high with DMT, then you'd trust him.


I think that people pushing the boundaries definitely have a role in any movement. They help to define the limits of what most will accept. Most people are probably not going to do some kind of acid any time soon, but NORML has become much more normal. High Times Magazine is no longer the publication of derelicts, and will be a staple in Colorado and Washington shops.

Trailblazers often stand alone because no one wants to get a bunch of thorns pushing aside the brush. Someone leads the pack. It's much easier to hike when the path is brown dirt and 5 feet wide.

[Sola_Fide]

Yawn.

Who cares?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

And speaking of mainstreaming High Times Magazine. I've viewed a handful of cooking shows in my life and barely browsed High Times Mag, but this looks pretty slick and glossy to me. Check out all the close-up cleavage shots and sexual innuendo with this woman. You might even be able to influence a couple of senate votes with all the jiggling and some legislative testimony by this woman. Definitely funnier than any cooking show on TV.




It ain't your mom's Julia Child show:




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ho8f-q-4xa4



http://www.hightimes.com/

[Philhelm]

Gandhi and MLK would have disagreed.

They can't disagree with anyone, as they were both cut down by the assassin's bullet.

[klamath]

I am confident that Adam did. You ... not so much.
I guess you didn't read Adam's post in another thread how when he got arrested a great deal of the donated money and his personal property got stolen by his trusted friends while he was in jail?

[PaulConventionWV]

Civil disobedience is useless. I'm glad Adam finally arrived at that conclusion. He should save his time and energy for the real fight.

At least somebody's happy that the system broke Adam's spirit.

On second thought, however, he seems very upbeat in his video. We'll see what happens.

[AuH20]

At least somebody's happy that the system broke Adam's spirit.

On second thought, however, he seems very upbeat in his video. We'll see what happens.

I'm just happy he wised up and will fight smarter in the future.

[torchbearer]

Am hoping they are just empty words,, spoken for the sake of walking free a few more days,, and nothing more.

(called "Playing the Game")

my spidey senses say yes.
do what you got to do to keep walking free in the land of the imprisoned.

[Czolgosz]

I like that Adam goes out and does shit. But, I am a little dissappointed.in the result.

He *should* have known the game before playing it. After all, we all know the game, and the mechanics of it have been on display for thousands of years. Adam seems to have simply run the same course as every other chump who gets snared in the State trap.

So what was the point?


Further, I'm not in the camp that you can ultimately be free w/o spilling any blood, I do however appreciate and respect those who are *trying* to resolve the matter in the method they think will be most effective. We *all* need to play the roles we have chosen.

[Anti Federalist]

I concur, that is a concise write up of where both of us are, I think.

ETA - I'd only say that, somewhere along that time line, prior to widespread support, some kind of physical action must take place, if only to do nothing but push the fence sitters and the "wait and see" folks into one camp or another.


I don't think it's so much of an "I'm right and AF is wrong" (or vice versa) kind of thing as it is a matter of a difference in perspective. (AF is saying an elephant is like a tree, and I am saying an elephant is like a rope.) For example, it is true that many thought the Bostonians had indeed gone off their nut - but those "many" were primarily conservative oligarchs (and their attendant hangers-on) who desired preservation of the status quo ante. Because of their positions of power and influence (in venues such as the colonial assemblies, for example), they were able to exercise a restraining influence on radical sentiment greatly out of proportion to their actual numbers.

In spite of this, an even greater part of the general population (artisans, farmers & "common folk") were becoming increasingly radicalized - especially after Lexington & Concord. (Upon those momentous events, they flocked to the banner - as a result, Boston was spontaneously invested by tens of thousands of militiamen who had come from Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire & elsewhere after hearing news of the "shot heard 'round the world.")

AF is also correct that there was staunch opposition in the colonial assemblies to declaring outright independence - even as late as 1776. Again, this opposition was comprised primarily of connected & influential "pro-establishment" reactionaries with vested interests. But despite this, the colonies did, in fact, declare independence - precisely because popular pro-independence sentiment was the stronger force in the end.

Revolutions are extremely dynamic things. There was never just one, single static level of "pro-independence" sentiment. Events can galvanize & change matters significantly (and sometimes seemingly "overnight"). But in the end, revolutionary insurgencies such as the American Revolution cannot succeed unless they enjoy the support of the bulk of the populace. Reactionary elites are only able to do so much in the face of popular resistance.

Of course, none of this is to say that everyone who (eventually) supported the Revolution were radical libertarian types like Samuel Adams. Especially among the conservatives, there were reactionaries who eventually resigned themselves to separation from Britain and joined the independence movement - and then proceded to do all that they could to ensure that independent America would preserve their oligarchic status & priveleges.

To summarize: I should not be understood as saying or implying there was a steady, homogeneous & high-level of support for independence throughout the revolutionary period. But there did come to be a preponderance of support for independence among the general population - otherwise, the Revolution could not possibly have succeeded.

Unfortunately, I just don't see that kind of thing happening again in America - at least, not on a nationwide scale. If it happens at all, I think it will require some momentous event (ala the collapse of Communism in the Soviet Union) combined with popularly supported local & regional separatist movements. (What the nature & character of those movements might be under such circumstances is another matter altogether - sadly, "separatist" does not mean "pro-liberty" ...)

[Anti Federalist]

Thanks for posting that, I knew I had seen similar figures apart from Adam's mis-quote.



In 2000 historian Robert Calhoon said the consensus of historians is...

40% - 45% Patriots
15% - 20% Loyalists
35% - 45% neutral

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_(American_Revolution)#Influence

[cajuncocoa]

I reached that conclusion because you said you would not contribute to those who could make only slight changes. Any individual politician or statesman is by definition only going to be able to make slight ones. Very slight, and often temporary, as the next group often overturns a number of positives from the previous group.
I contributed to Ron, Amash and Massie because all 3 could make huge permanent changes if there were more in Congress just like them. The problem with some of those who are being pushed on this board as "liberty candidates" pale in comparison to those 3. Since Ron is no longer running, I will contribute to Justin and Thomas but not likely any of those who will only make "slight" and/or "temporary" changes.

[Occam's Banana]

I concur, that is a concise write up of where both of us are, I think.

ETA - I'd only say that, somewhere along that time line, prior to widespread support, some kind of physical action must take place, if only to do nothing but push the fence sitters and the "wait and see" folks into one camp or another.

Absolutely. "Educative" factors (like civil disobedience, "winning heats & minds," etc.) are critically necessary for laying groundwork - but as necessary as it is, education alone is not sufficient to "get over the hump," so to speak. You must also have "experiential" factors - the proverbial "boot in the face" - to bring things out of the abstract and into the concrete. Lexington & Concord were the "experiential" galvanizing sparks in the case of the American Revolution. But those sparks would not have caught fire if the tinder had not been well-prepared by the previous "educative" work of pamphleteers, boycotters, Tea Partiers, and various other "rabble rousers."

[Deborah K]

Nobody actually said it. Cajun implied it, which is what I replied too.



Obviously it shouldn't be initiated. That's a given. The real question is, how much do you let them aggress against you before you fight back?

I'm firmly in the camp of "Feeling like its the only way anything will get better." I don't want it, but I think its unavoidable. The only question is, how long will it take? The answer to that question is directly related to how much tyranny we're willing to tolerate, because the tyrants are not going to stop on their own.

Its easier said than done, but if the liberty movement as a group drew the line in the same place, we'd be more effective.

Started another discussion about this here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?441886-Speculating-about-SHTF-scenarios&p=5382334#post5382334

[Feeding the Abscess]

I reached that conclusion because you said you would not contribute to those who could make only slight changes. Any individual politician or statesman is by definition only going to be able to make slight ones. Very slight, and often temporary, as the next group often overturns a number of positives from the previous group.

I don't think I could have written a better refutation of the political process as an avenue through which achieving freedom is possible than this.

[qh4dotcom]

Depending on how you want to view that phrase, it could be taken as a left handed smack.

But more than likely he's broken, he will retreat off somewhere to lick his wounds, get a "normal" job and keep his mouth shut, happy to stay out of the rape cage.

Can't say as I blame him one bit.

We don't deserve the likes of Adam K. any more than we deserve the likes of Ed Snowden.

Why risk your neck for people who don't give a shit, who want to be tyrannized, and hate you for trying to prevent that.

Congratulations, all you folks that wished Adam would just STFU and go away, you got your wish.

Not me...I donated to Kokesh for Congress and his defense fund.

[Christian Liberty]

Yawn.

Who cares?

I respect Adam for putting himself out there and standing up to the tyrants in DC. Why wouldn't you? Has the system gotten you to the point where you are confident that nothing can be done about it? Even if not, don't we have a duty to try?

The real question is whether Adam was truly broken or not. I doubt he was, based on the words he used. And I like when anyone makes the US government look foolish like I think Adam did.

And... if you REALLY don't care, why post at all? At the very least, you want everyone else to "not care" with you. Why?;)

[liberty2897]

Adam has certainly been inspirational to me. Thank you for what you do Adam.

[JohnM]

Gandhi and MLK would have disagreed.

There is smart civil disobedience and there is dumb civil disobedience - and there is civil disobedience that is somewhere in between.


Gandhi and MLK knew what they were doing, and in hindsight it is pretty clear that what they did was smart.


It's too early to say how smart Adam's actions were.

[jmdrake]

Depending on how you want to view that phrase, it could be taken as a left handed smack.

But more than likely he's broken, he will retreat off somewhere to lick his wounds, get a "normal" job and keep his mouth shut, happy to stay out of the rape cage.

Can't say as I blame him one bit.

We don't deserve the likes of Adam K. any more than we deserve the likes of Ed Snowden.

Why risk your neck for people who don't give a shit, who want to be tyrannized, and hate you for trying to prevent that.

Congratulations, all you folks that wished Adam would just STFU and go away, you got your wish.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again.

Here's the deal. Civil disobedience is only effective if it is mass civil disobedience.

Edit: I wish people would watch this movie about Reverend Vernon Johns. He proceeded MLK at the church from which the Montgomery bus boycott would be launched. While he was an advocate of non-violent resistance against racism, he wasn't able to get masses of people to go along with him. However, many feel that he made it easier for MLK to start a nationwide movement later. Regardless of what you think of MLK and the civil rights movement, there is a lesson to be learned here. Adam Kokesh didn't have the mass of people willing to go to jail with him to make his protest effective. Will this be the beginning or the end of what he was trying to do? That is an open question.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRuZF7LMXcc

[jmdrake]

The hands of tyranny can only be forcibly removed. It's in the inherent nature of these people to dominate. They cannot be cured or rehabilitated from these pathological passions. That's the way the world works unfortunately.

The big hands of tyranny require many little hands to do their work for them. MLK and Gandhi were successful because they managed to make it impossible, uncomfortable, and unpopular for the many little hands to do the work of the big hands. One person loading a shotgun in D.C. wasn't enough to count for squat any more than one person shooting a shotgun = a popular uprising. If everybody that thought gun control was garbage was willing to march on Washington and do the exact same thing A.K. did at the exact same time, one way or another there would have been a different result.