We Are Destroyed

[Proph]

Does their failure to recognize excuse or otherwise validate the actions?

A man rushes toward you with a gun yelling "this is where you die". He thinks he is in the right, seeing no harm. What do YOU do - stand idly to see how things play out, or do you take action? This is exactly what happened to me on 6/3 when a truck driver on I-64 threatened to murder my wife and myself. He waved a Glock at us, then got out of his truck, approached us, say "this is where you die", and then walked right up to the front of our vehicle, at which point I'd had quite enough of threats and proceeded to run him over with the Subaru. His intentions were irrelevant. His threats, however, were not and I took action with my primary weapon.

Self-defense is the only justified use of violence. (I feel obliged to say this, because you have repeatedly tried to paint me as a pacifist.)

The threat of governmental intrusion is always there. Does this mean everyone should send their cars into the homes of the nearest government employee? (Of course not!)

Ultimately, each person is responsible for how he or she handles tyranny and tyrants -- agents of the State, or not -- if/when those interactions occur.

We agree, but the fact is that they currently face no consequence that dissuades, which is why they continue to misbehave.

.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Assuming it is so, it is quite clear that we are nowhere nearly having put enough through said system. So what now?



You persist in making this brand of claim, yet no less than twenty years of internet communications have as yet failed to produce the results you claim. One can no longer credibly assert that awareness is lacking. Awareness not to the liking of the beholder is being vehemently rejected. People are not interested in truths that chafe, and so they call it "lies" and do what humans have always done.

You've never heard of bubbling?

Maybe. The ignorance is now so deep and widespread, it appears that no amount of state transgression will rouse the rest to your much vaunted civil disobedience. If the trespass we now endure is not enough to give cause, then pray you tell what amount is? How far must the American people be debased before they say "ENOUGH!"? Thus far, we are laid low and show no indication of refusal. This bodes poorly.

Enough people must become negatively affected before their cries of "Enough!" are finally heard. The public's perception of police has drastically changed in recent decades, though the odds are still certainly in the State's favor. No one wants to believe that their governments -- more accurately, the people working within it -- are corrupt and reckless, but after enough exposure, the truth inevitably comes out.

It could well be, I acknowledge, but there is little to no indication of it. That may just be the nature of these sorts of things... but equally so it may not be. Since neither of us have lived through such times before, I will suggest that neither of us have sufficient basis for prediction beyond mere speculation. In my favor, however, rests the long history of human corruption that has lead to the rise of countless tyrants whose trickery has remained unchanged for thousands of years, yet has worked like a charm every time. We fail to learn from the errors of our forebears precisely because to do so requires too much effort and risk. Any wiggle room that allows for rationalizing our lassitude, cowardice, and greed is made full use with a predictability that leaves "chance" as a non-factor. Humans are rotten creatures in this regard and currently show no sign of improvement. Were this not the case, I daresay that the likes of Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, Pot, and so on would never have been possible, just as the Tsars, kings, and emperors would not have in times longer past because Freemen would have slaughtered them and their families in erasure of the stain upon what would have been the good name of humanity those bloodlines represented. There would have been real and horrific consequences in store for any and all men daring to stand in violation of their fellows. But no - we have consistently demurred of our responsibilities to our freedoms, acceding to the felonious mandates of men with no more authority to rule YOU than does a cockroach possess.

I do not believe you will be able to slice this pie in a way that paints us in any better a light, but please do give it a whirl. Once again, I am open to persuasion, but the argument must be a good one.

It all depends on where you want to look, and how you want to look at it. (Freedom may be declining in America -- and elsewhere -- but protests like the Gillette Jaunes and the more recent anti-extradition protests in Hong Kong show that people aren't completely complacent, yet.)

[osan]

"The Meaner's" ignorance will eventually catch up with them.

Perhaps, but thus far it has not. Besides, what do you mean by this, specifically? You would seem to imply that in so catching, the average boob will see the light of truth and come around to reason. I am yet to be convinced of this.

(I used to think that your "Themme" and "Theye" approach was useful, even revolutionary, but thinking like this for too long encourages collectivist tendencies.)

For too long? However long Theye exist as a functional monobloc tyrant, I would say that the notion remains valid.

Translated: "Violence will solve the problem!"

It very well might. Employing violence to rid oneself of a tyrant is not the problem. The challenge lies in not becoming the latest tyrant in the wake of victory. We're actually fairly good at killing off tyrants when we are of a mind to do so. What we suck at is managing afterward.

What happens when Theye think the same thing about you?

Depends on Theire nature. Lenin and Stalin murdered tens of millions, as did Mao and the rest of those communist swine.

Your implicit calls to action violate natural law as much as any tyrant's

,

I'm not calling anyone to action. If we as a statistical gestalt have no interest in our freedoms, who am I to shove them down everyones' throats?

and could easily be interpreted as a threat.

Only by those whose threat assessment skills leave far too much to be desired.

Thumping your chest only exacerbates the situation. (You sound like Bolton, Pompeo, and company attempting regime change: "It'll be quick, a matter of days or weeks at most!" We all know that plans never go so smoothly, and you ought to by now, too.)

You have read into my words that which is not there. If it were, I'd happily cop to it. I don't hide my positions on such matters.

[osan]

Self-defense is the only justified use of violence. (I feel obliged to say this, because you have repeatedly tried to paint me as a pacifist.)

two things. Firstly, self-defense does not preclude preemptive strikes. One is not obliged to wait for someone to take a shot at them before taking action.

Secondly, I have painted you as anything. I don't know you. I don't even know what sex you are, so trust me when I say that I paint nothing of the sort. As for being a pacifist, I myself am just that. What I am not is PASSIVE. The two are quite different.

The threat of governmental intrusion is always there. Does this mean everyone should send their cars into the homes of the nearest government employee? (Of course not!)

That would depend on the totality of the circumstance. "Of course not" implies "never", and never is a very long time.

Ultimately, each person is responsible for how he or she handles tyranny and tyrants -- agents of the State, or not -- if/when those interactions occur.

That is perhaps so, but it makes no matter insofar as one's failure to effectively address the tyrant and his stooges. Tolerance of the intolerable begets nothing other than more of the same.

You've never heard of bubbling?

The term is unfamiliar.

Enough people must become negatively affected before their cries of "Enough!" are finally heard.

This assumes Theye would give a rat's patootie. That is a very poor assumption to make.

The public's perception of police has drastically changed in recent decades, though the odds are still certainly in the State's favor. No one wants to believe that their governments -- more accurately, the people working within it -- are corrupt and reckless, but after enough exposure, the truth inevitably comes out.

I've lived in twelve states including NY, NJ, PA, FL, TX, IL, WA, CA, OR, AZ, CO, and WV. I've had these brands of conversations with thousands of people over the past 30 years and can tell you without equivocation that people are very aware of what is going on, for the most part. They just don't do anything about it. There is your problem.

It all depends on where you want to look, and how you want to look at it. (Freedom may be declining in America -- and elsewhere -- but protests like the Gillette Jaunes and the more recent anti-extradition protests in Hong Kong show that people aren't completely complacent, yet.)

People don't have to be completely complacent, but only sufficiently so in order for the tyrant to prevail.

Humans may surprise themselves before all is said and done. Equally likely, they may not. Thus far, things do not look very promising, but who knows...

[TheTexan]

Perhaps we should be focusing on education.

Have we tried handing out pamphlets that explain to voters how their entire world view is immoral and that they should be doing things our way?

[Proph]

It very well might. Employing violence to rid oneself of a tyrant is not the problem. The challenge lies in not becoming the latest tyrant in the wake of victory. We're actually fairly good at killing off tyrants when we are of a mind to do so. What we suck at is managing afterward.

"We" had better figure that out before "we" go toppling tyrannic regimes, then. (Communicate to educate. Such cannot be managed.)

[osan]

"We" had better figure that out before "we" go toppling tyrannic regimes, then.

Unfortunately, we are most often not afforded such luxuries of time to perfect ourselves prior of taking action. When such choices are forced upon people and immediacy rules the day, they either act with the necessary dispatch, or watch as the window of opportunity to preserve themselves closes.

The human world is often rather messy.

[TheTexan]

Unfortunately, we are most often not afforded such luxuries of time to perfect ourselves prior of taking action. When such choices are forced upon people and immediacy rules the day, they either act with the necessary dispatch, or watch as the window of opportunity to preserve themselves closes.

The human world is often rather messy.

We have plenty of time to figure it out. There's no rush.

If tyranny ever does happen, it's gonna be super far into the future.

It's all sunshine and roses currently. Nope, no tyranny here. Everything is just hunky dory.

[nobody's_hero]

I don't think you're ever gonna get around the need for leaders. I mean, jeez, look what happened to this place after Ron Paul retired. Whatever trivial differences we put aside to rally behind Ron have become full blown schisms.

[osan]

I don't think you're ever gonna get around the need for leaders. I mean, jeez, look what happened to this place after Ron Paul retired. Whatever trivial differences we put aside to rally behind Ron have become full blown schisms.

While I usually subscribe to "never say never", short of reset I don't think your position can be successfully dismantled.

[jllundqu]

While I usually subscribe to "never say never", short of reset I don't think your position can be successfully dismantled.

Oh how I've missed your writing, good sir.

"We are über-copulated. The tyrant's mega-dong lives in our backsides and every day he pushes a smidge more deeply as we sit in idle, inert tolerance." Is now going to be on my sig line.

Were you to write a book, I would certainly offer up my coin.

[osan]

Oh how I've missed your writing, good sir.

Color me most flattered.

"We are über-copulated. The tyrant's mega-dong lives in our backsides and every day he pushes a smidge more deeply as we sit in idle, inert tolerance." Is now going to be on my sig line.

I'm here to help.

Were you to write a book, I would certainly offer up my coin.

Funny your should mention that...

A friend and I were having some philosophical exchanges a couple of months ago and we came away agreeing to co-author a book that depicts what I daresay is a better world where "government" serves in quiet yet palpable fear of doing the wrong things for the draconian punishments that await them in the event they violate the rights of those to whom they swear an oath of faithful and competent service. Our working title is "The Island". Some may recall my solution for criminality: four islands thousands of miles separated by vast waters. Two for women and two for men. The "outer" island would be for felons of a lesser sin. They do their time and then go home. The "inner" island, or island #2 is for those for whom there shall be no redemption. You go and you never return, all else equal.

We are in the concept stage, plotting and scheming themes, story architecture, etc. It is a thought experiment of sorts, a voyage into what might be, were men cut of a slightly better cloth where "government" is actually held to its obligations of service and violators are held to the fire, first and every time.

[Republicanguy]

It's pretty simple really:

A - Mind your own business.

B- Keep your hands to yourself.

Until the religious tell us how to believe, and what to wear, what is correct. blah blah. Yeah yeah. The user is correct about some overall points.

[osan]

...if we... could even populate it.

A $64 question. That fact alone is fairly sad.