"When once a republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil"
-Thomas Jefferson

For better than thirty years I have been telling this to people, at times with nodding heads in response, at others with glazed stares. On far more occasions than I care to recall, people of a certain bent would launch into a diatribe at me about how violence is never the solution, even though I never mention the dreaded "v-word". That's not to say I feel that violence is a universal evil as some do, because I don't. As with all things, violence has its place. However, it must also be noted that as with hatred, a little goes a very long way, but let me not digress so early on.

The American republic has problems. Some will say our troubles root in the faults of our architecture. This is certainly a valid point, for our Constitution carries with it the DNA for the death of the republic for which it stands as blueprint. The power to tax is perhaps the greatest of these faults of design, but such flaws cannot bear the full measure of blame for the ways in which we have devolved as a people over the past two hundred years. By far the great proportion of culpability lies with we, the glorious people.

I have given endless consideration and deep thought regarding the path that America has trod for at least forty five years since I became a young adult. Long ago I could see that things were not progressing in a direction in which I could place my confidence and esteem. Quite the contrary, we have descended the path leading into a hole from which a sulfuric stench issues and the horizons of which lie dark and menacing.

For a while I wondered whether I was just being some sort of genetic pessimist in my perceptions, but as the "dotcom" era began blossoming, an endeavor in which I found myself up to my eyeballs as an R&D computer scientist, I began realizing that my sixth-sense notions regarding humanity's general direction were not mistaken. Indeed, by whatever grace or freak of chance, those recognitions were on the money. The odd thing about it, at least for me, was that no matter how deeply into the grim went my prognostications, the realities that followed have always been equal to, or worse than what I'd dare declare as probable.

Back in 1992 when USENET was the "social media" of the day, I once made the prediction that one day the pedophiles would come out of their closets and demand the right to rape children. In recent years NAMBLA† has come forward, effectively demanding their right to rape little boys with their declaration that being adults sexually attracted to small boys was nothing other than a "lifestyle choice." In 1992 my suggestion was considered utterly outrageous, even by myself, and yet my inner voice said "sit back and wait. Time will tell." Thirty two years later...

How is is possible for a once sound people to have degenerated to such a degree? The answer is simple: the absence of a warrior culture. It is no more complicated than that. America was wrong from Day One in this respect. Although much closer to the ideal in 1776, Americans were even then cut of a cloth that was not quite up to snuff for the liberties that the brave and gallant men of the Great Revolt, as I like to call it (the American Revolution, "revolution" being a term I dislike for the vast baggage it carries) had gifted them. The truth of this becomes apparent when one considers the response far too many Americans gave when the first Congress passed the so-called "whiskey tax", which was signed into effect by the turncoat to liberty, George Washington. The Whisky Rebellion lasted four years, between 1791 and 1794, and in my opinion was a mishmash of poor decisions on both sides of the disagreement, the greatest error being the enactment of the vile tax statute in the first place.

This brings us right back to the notion of "warrior culture". But what exactly is such a culture? The concise answer is this: warrior culture is one where intelligent, well-educated, and morally sound people who understand the ins and outs of proper human freedom, hold closely and with stern grip an attitude of utter and unremitting intolerance of the intolerable. This definition, of course, begs the questions of what constitutes "proper human freedom" and that which is "intolerable". Those may be discussions for another day, though I have essentially covered all this in previous writings.

As Jefferson wrote in a letter to Charles Yancey on 6 January, 1816, "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." Free people living under the circumstances of civilization, which is now nearly universal on planet earth, cannot remain at liberty for long if they allow succeeding generations to slip into ignorance. We in America, over the past 100 or so years, have borne witness to the searing and unequivocal truth of Jefferson's words. Our general descent into the maelstrom of ignorance has accelerated at an alarming rate over the past twenty years, and even more greatly so in the last decade.

Humans by their nature are predatory beings. In states of civilization, their natural hunting proclivities are given little to no avenue for expression. Our ideals of peaceable coexistence chafes against our hard-wired drive to go out a kill stuff. Part of humanity's remedy for this clear problem has been the institution of artificial competitions of all sorts. Football, basketball, soccer, baseball, boxing, and the rest of the manifold means of sublimating the human killer instinct and allowing it to be vented in a more or less safe manner, have proven not quite sufficient to the task. Not all people are content to live vicariously through the experiences of 300-pound fullbacks slamming into each other at full-throttle. There are those for whom the first-hand experience of prevailing over their fellow men is absolutely essential. Most eschew serial murder, partly because it is frowned upon most grimly by the Law, and perhaps also because it is a step too far for those who fancy themselves apex predators, yet for whom actual apex predation proves too scary for risk. In other words, they are big-yakking blowhards who want the thrill without the downside of raw chance whereby they might meet a sticky end. And so they often find themselves in the political arena, busying themselves with new and creative ways of trespassing upon the sovereign rights of their fellow human beings in the effort to make themselves feel important and as if they were the true alpha dwellers of the social apex, which they can never really be for a lack of courage and commitment. But making believe, at the grave expense of those around them, is just the sweet spot in which they find their greatest comfort and cheap thrill while others suffer outrage upon insult. They are the ultimate wannabes.

This saddest of all qualities in some humans is precisely that which has reduced all humanity to the dregs to which we now find ourselves relegated in terms of real status. But equally pathetic and far more dangerous are those who tolerate these gross and unpardonable intrusions upon the valid prerogatives of Freemen. This is where we Americans have failed to utterly, shamefully, and embarrassingly. The reason we have failed so boldly, is the absence of the warrior mentality which knows right from wrong and is willing and indeed eager to thrash with great violence those who unjustly trample upon their fellows.

Know that which may be tolerated and that which may not. It is actually quite simple, though I am the first to point out that it is not easy. Learning what to bear and what to reject is supremely difficult because it bumps against our innermost desires, whatever those may be. If I choose to be intolerant of the intolerable in others, I must also reject it for myself, lest I plunge headlong into hypocrisy, a status which leaves me half a notch below that of a child molester. I say with confidence that there exists no lower creature upon the earth than the hypocrite.

Free men living in a civilized state must manifest the following qualities:

  1. Strong intellect
  2. Smarts
  3. Integrity that manifests in part as stern intolerance of the intolerable
  4. Honor
  5. Responsibility
  6. Generosity
  7. Courage

Without these qualities in sufficient levels and ubiquity, a putatively free people is doomed to the same results we now enjoy in America. We have chosen, as matters of will, the unsavory in the false belief that it makes us "different" and therefore "edgy*". We as a people, and here I speak statistically, have sold our souls for a grand pack of lies which falsely proclaims what it means to be a proper American, the central requirement there being to turn one's back to everything once regarded as right and proper between men, in favor of the wretched, vile, and ineffectual. This is not to say that all things new are bad. I consider the sexual liberation of humanity to be one of the few bright results that have issued from those whose other offerings have lead men down the garden path. Sadly though, even that once good direction has been perverted by certain interests, resulting in said liberation being derailed in a way that now turns what is certainly one of the divine elements of human relations into something cheap and soulless.

Enlightened self-interest may be the term that best nutshells the central necessity for all men who love freedom and wish to remain at liberty.

As for the seven qualities, lets give a Cliff Notes gloss.

Strong Intellect

I believe this speaks for itself, prima facie. Without good intellectual power, how will people find themselves able to become smart in a broad and effective manner?


It is not enough to have a good mind, which is more or less a matter of inborn talent. Talent without development leads to having no skill of which to speak. Smarts is a certain sort of skill, which is the cultivation of one's God-given talents such that he becomes capable. Capability is an ultimate quality in a human being. Few things are as pitiful as the sight of a man who has no real capacity to get things done, for it means he has no real and meaningful power. He is as an empty shell.


Trust is perhaps the single most important thing that two human beings can have between themselves. I see no other quality that so much as equals the critical importance of trust, much less surpasses it. Without trust, men have no basis for relationships, save that they avoid each other at every possible turn, and when it is not possible, they are reduced to murdering one another. The momentousness of trust cannot be overstated.

The integrity of a man is central to his trustworthiness. If you are not seen as so worthy, nobody with a lick of sense will want to have anything to do with you.


Honorable is an element of integrity that narrows the sense of it. A man may have integrity, yet may not be honorable. Integrity speaks to a certain, let us say minimal, degree of predictability in a man, which in turn speaks to his trustworthiness; but not all trustworthiness is good. Scoundrels and felons may be trustworthy in that you know they are going to consistently act against your interests. This is a good thing, in a backhanded manner, because at least you know that with which you are dealing.

Honor brings a certain quality of desirability to the idea of integrity. The honorable man is not only one of integrity, but whose constitution carries qualities that others not only trust, but value in a positive way. The honorable man may be trusted to watch you children outside while they run into the store for tonight's dinner ingredients.


Responsibility speaks to the ownership of one's words and deeds. Responsibility is one's duty toward certain things, which may include but is not limited to not trespassing upon the equal rights of his fellows, for example. We carry responsibility for our actions. If I am shooting a firearm under "normal" conditions such as while deer hunting, I am responsible for the safety of others such that I not mistakenly or carelessly injure them by my gunshot. Under exigent circumstances such as in defense of one's life, the specific requirements of responsibility may be relaxed, depending on the particulars of a given case.

Responsibility, along with the other elements of this list, carries the element of enlightened self-interest. Extending my sense of responsibility beyond my own immediate and obvious self-interest can indeed prove to be conducive and protective of those interests, if often in indirect and seemingly oblique ways. For instance, my choosing to assume some manner and degree of responsibility for the rights of my fellow men may result in the better guarantees of my own rights. When I see a woman being assaulted by a brute, I have before me a choice: get involved or walk on by. Granted, I may not be in full or even sufficient knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the apparent assault, but I am nonetheless faced with the choice of whether to render help. But if my assumptions of unjust assault, based on appearances, proves correct, then by rendering aid to the apparent victim, I am helping protect her rights. If enough men so choose to safeguard the rights of their fellows, then the security of all rights it by that quantum enhanced and better guaranteed. Enlightened self-interest, indeed.

I will note that vast numbers of people recoil at the notion of being responsible. That is why proper freedom is so utterly unpopular.

When we speak of generosity in this context, we are not referring to the opening of the purse or the giving of material items to those whom we deem as "in need" or "less fortunate". The relevant sense of "generosity" here is that which says we respect the equal and just rights of our fellows just as we expect them to respect ours. Once again, a strong aversion to hypocrisy is an absolute requirement for being a free human being. Hypocrisy is criminal at its core and criminality has no rightful place in a free land.

I give you your life, you give me mine. It is a simple as that, and yet this has proven monumentally evasive for vast legions of humanity, whether actively so, or passively. After all, without the (at least) tacit approval, the tolerance of "the people", would the blood soaked tyrannies of the Soviet Union and communist China have been possible? Methinks not likely.

If you want life, give life. If you want love, give it. If you want respect, be respectful. If you want your ways to be tolerated (all else equal), then be tolerant of those of others (again, all else equal).

The Golden Rule is the basis of this sense of generosity. Without it, we reduce ourselves to carping, grasping, and ultimately warring.


Free men must be courageous, but what does that mean? I can paraphrase by stating that courage is the quality of quaking in one's boots with fear, yet pressing on to the object of your terror and reticence in spite of it all.

Without courage, knowing what must be done is likely to leave a man timidly demurring from doing the right things. When "governments" overstep, one must not just have the knowledge of right and wrong such that they recognize the evil that is being perpetrated, for that is only half of the equation. The other side of the equal sign is the resolute decision to act with authority to make an end of the wrong, and most often that means taking on the great Goliath we call "government". If that does not frighten you, then somewhere along the line you have lost your most basic sense of self-preservation. But if you have retained your healthy fear of that which poses grave danger, and you are willing to face it nonetheless, then you are indeed courageous and worthy of every man's esteem.

For a moment let us park ourselves in Albert Einstein's backyard and engage in a thought experiment of sorts.

Imagine if you will a land where the people are free and there exists a body of hard men who walk the walls for the sake of their fellows' liberties. These men we may call "warriors". They brook no defilement of the rights of their fellow men. They walk the wall in defiance of all comers who might fancy a swing at such people. Now imagine that as time passes and the concerns for liberty of the people inside the walls fade as is inevitable with nearly all humans. In time they forget their basics of what it means to be a free people. After all, they have the men on the walls who protect them, so why should they busy themselves with such matters? Those men are even paid, so we're entitled to ignore those things with which the hired help must consume themselves.

Given enough time, this separation becomes so broad and the people so far removed from their own roots, they begin to degenerate into softness and all manned of decadences. As life becomes ever easier for the common man, they tend to get bored and by that impulse strike out for new amusements. We in America and the "west" in general have borne first-hand witness to the results of such conditions. Sexual liberation becomes perversion. Tolerance becomes tantamount to suicidal apathy, and so on down the dreary list of degenerative symptoms of a people in decline, falling from the status of Freeman to that of willing slave, thinking himself still free just because the Whipmaster has deigned to afford him an expansive and gilt cage, replete with all manner of amusing diversions.

Meanwhile, the men on the wall remain, if luck also remain with the protected. But the moment those hard men begin falling to the degradations of the broader culture, all stand to face doom before too much longer, for decay is like the most aggressive of malignancies.

This dolorous and most pitiable and shameful inevitability can be prevented by only one means: warrior culture which pervades the minds and souls of the average man. To separate the warriors from the rest, as the sheep are separated from the dogs, is to all but guarantee the eventual demise of a people. Because human beings by their nature prey upon other human beings, the best guarantee for the liberties of all is to ensure that very nearly all be trained up as warriors, intolerant of trespass and ready and eager to bring to wrack, ruin, and obliteration all who fail to live up to the minimal standards of interpersonal comport.

Without the mean man's ability and uncompromising will to see to his rights with a vicious and venomous single mindedness, he dooms not only himself, but his fellows as well to decay into something that is not free. And so the question really turns on whether one is an actual and true lover of freedom, willing to become a monster when circumstance demands it. I have found that most are not; they talk the big talk, but walk but a few steps pursuant, wanting all the benefits of liberty without having to bear the stresses, strains, and other burdens of becoming free, and then of holding onto liberty. There is always another human being ready and eager to take from others that to which he is not entitled. The human world is rotten with criminals of all stripes, not all of them rapists, robbers, or murderers. Defend your rights as a warrior, or you have no rights. A right exists only if it is asserted, and once declared, must be defended, or it becomes as if it never existed in the first place.

Warrior culture is that of the man who knows who he is, what is right, what is wrong, and tolerates no trespass of his sovereign rights by anyone, at any time, for any reason, though he reserves his authority to make such determinations as to exceptions to this general maxim. However, such exceptions are a tricky fish upon which to keep hold. They should be few and given only in the most wisely chosen cases, lest people then eventually end up giving away the farm that is their liberty to the barbarians who would have your hide drying on the barn door, given the chance to make it so.

Warrior culture is the only one suitable to free men. All others lead to inevitable destruction by cultural suicide, and even that of the warrior can end in the same result when the people relax their vigilance in the absence of clear and apparent threats. As the old saying goes, easy times make weak men. Weak men make hard times. Hard times make strong men. Strong men make easy times. Perhaps this cycle cannot be avoided, but does it not behoove us to at least try?

It's an all or nothing deal. In for a penny, in for a pound. Otherwise, do not even bother starting.

Once again I bid you adieu, and please accept my best wishes.

†North American Man Boy Love Association, advocates of the rape of little boys.
*The notion of "edginess" revolts me to no end. It is the goal of low-rent wannabes for whom image without substance is the grand virtue of their miserable existences.