"Patriot" rhetoric - harmful, helpful or neither

[biere]

In some ccw courses the instructors tell the students that if there is time it is a good idea to voice the fact you feel threatened since it makes it known to witnesses around you and it may stop someone who does not actually pose a threat but is acting odd.

I think that is what a lot of folks are doing when they quote the founding fathers and talk about claire wolfe's books and what not.

I personally am to the point that I wonder if the elected officials care to even listen.

 

[cuchulainn]

thereisnospoon: I voted helpful, just to piss off Cuch

Actually, you made me happy by voting, no matter what your choice.

BA110N Man: Just so your latest counter-post does not confuse those "listening":

[followed by bullet points]

Well, now you are addressing the point about violent rhetoric, instead of continuing with your previous straw man argument about remaining silent.

Thanks for your input. Sorry, but as I said in the opening post way back in March, I'm not going to debate who's right or wrong in this thread.

BA110N Man: Then we have to rember Clements comments, "...there are lies, damb lies, and statistics."

Well, the poll isn't even statically valid since it's self-selective. What's valid here are the comments from the voters.

By the way, Clemens (no T) attributed the quote to Disraeli. See: http://www.twainquotes.com/Statistics.html

Bartleby suggests numerous other possible originators. See http://www.bartleby.com/73/1769.html

BA110N Man: Are you in the legal profession by chance?

Nope.

 

[BA110N Man]

Pearls and pigs

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast your pearls before the swine, lest haply they trample them under their feet, and turn and rend you.

Good bye...

 

[cuchulainn]

Oink Oink Bow Wow

 

[McCall911]

Yeah, I know: "Holy resurrected threads, Batman!"


I voted "Neither" on the principle that "Talk is cheap."
That's all.

 

[Lobotomy Boy]

My opinion of this has changed 180 degrees since this thread was first posted. In March I would have never dreamed that we would have a presidential administration claiming it was above the law. Breaking the law, yes--they've all pretty much done that, but this one has the hubris to say the law doesn't apply to them. Reagan said, "I made a mistake." The current president just tells us to go eff ourselves in the a. In March I would have thought armed insurection in this country unthinkable. Now that we've got an executive branch advocating we repeal the Posse Comitatus Act in order to fight the flu, I'm starting to worry that it's inevitable.

 

[madmike]

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=185609 reference veiled threats made here by lefties.

Now, actual proposals of criminal acts have no place here. As to political and hypothetical rants by outraged Americans: irrelevant.

There's nothing good we can say our enemies won't subvert against us (reference the JBT comment that was originally made by a Democrat).

The suggestion is that by exercising our Second Amendment, we should then not exercise our First.

This falls under the "Don't make waves. Give them what they want and maybe they'll leave us alone" strategy our enemies use. I refuse to crawl, I refuse to snivel.

I don't give terrorists, criminals or civil rights enemies what they want. They don't like what I say? Good. I will be posting more anti-Mohammed artwork, more condemnations of crime and more personal but logical attacks on Brady, et al. To quote Bo Gritz, "When you get flak, it means you're over the target."

The other option leads to a case where people don't know we exist and we fade into that winter's night from lack of cohesiveness, where we're ashamed of what we are and what we believe, and where our enemies can say, "See? They don't REALLY intend to stage a revolution no matter what happens, so the Second Amendment is invalid in the modern day."

Oh, wait. Have they said that already?

I intend no violation of US law, and do not condone it--this is why I swore and maintain an oath to the Constitution. But I DO reserve the duty, right and PRIVILEGE to stand up and kill the enemies of it if they cross a line that my reason, honor and morals tell me is the line that Must Not Be Crossed.

Ashamed of it?

I'm proud of it.

 

[longeyes]

don't get stuck on nice

"Do not go gentle into that good night
Rage rage against the dying of the light"

The Second Amendment is not "nice;" it is about the ability to get a boot off your neck.

That said, the Second Amendment is not for hotheads, either; it's for protecting liberty and responsible citizenship.

 

[madmike]

John Elder: welcome!

The problem is, if it's done by our elected government officials, it's within the system. It may be unconstitutional, but only the courts get to decide that. You don't get to pick and choose which decisions you abide by without regressing to anarchy.

The catalyst for the Revolution was a bona-fide foreign infestation of troops with orders to confiscate property and the means of dissent at gunpoint.

As an immigrant, I can honestly say it's STILL better here than anywhere else. We have not yet reached that catalyst. The barn is doused with gasoline, but no one has taken out a box of matches yet.

Therefore, rhetoric aside, we have to work within the system.

I left the UK before it reached the current slippery slope. But back then, we had a saying:

We remember Guy Fawkes Day to celebrate the failure of the Gunpowder Plot to blow up Parliament...and to remind them that it wouldn't have been an entirely bad thing had it happened.

The four boxes of freedom: Soap, ballot, jury and cartridge.

Vote within the system, and keep your powder dry.

 

[madmike]

John, I don't disagree with you. I've written entire books from that POV

But tax, as much as I despise it, has ALWAYS been a "legitimate" government tool. And the people we elect it set it. I'm sorry the voters are idiots, but it is constitutional. I agree it was never forseen to be the seething morass it is, but there you have it.

And no matter how bad you think our economy is. It. Is. Worse. EVERYWHERE. Else. Check out the World Factbook and compare a few places.

Yes, confiscation goes on all the time. But if you look, it's generally less so now than at many other times in our history. It's just better publicized now. That's a good thing.

There have been incidents like Waco. The legal resolution is unsatisfactory. But it's still not the standing order to shoot people for dissenting. Then and only then will it be morally safe to stage a revolution (or as I say, REvoloooooooSHUN!" with credibility.

Of course, if you find yourself in a personal situation that justifies it before then, I'll gladly send ammo, publicity and legal aid. We must all hang together...

 

[Meplat]

wake me up when my group gets called up (Group S).

Since I'm on the Group "W" bench, trying to wake up after a Thanksgiving dinner that can't be beat, will you call me as you're suiting up?

 

[madmike]

I briefly quoted von Mises in Freehold.

This isn't the type of rhetoric he's referring too, though. This is poli debate. He's talking about the "there will soon come a day when we put the bastards against the wall" talk.

I often feel as you do. Then I remind myself I am a sovereign individual and better than the scum I wade through.

If the revolution happens, I'll be one of the survivors. If not, I will be one of the voices of reason. Meantime, chop up some sacred cows, we have burgers to grill!

And that's all we can do.

 

[cuchulainn]

madmike: If the revolution happens, I'll be one of the survivors.

The graveyards of past wars and revolutions are full of well-trained and well-prepared men who believed the same thing. You'd be more a "voice of reason" to limit yourself simply to saying you'll be more ready than most to survive, but maybe you'll still die. Bullets have a funny way of missing the idiots and hitting the proficient fellows wading through the scum ... shrapnel's even more erratic.

Freehold was an enjoyable read, BTW.

 

[madmike]

The graveyards of past wars and revolutions are full of well-trained and well-prepared men who believed the same thing. You'd be more a "voice of reason" to limit yourself simply to saying you'll be more ready than most to survive, but maybe you'll still die. Bullets have a funny way of missing the idiots and hitting the proficient fellows wading through the scum ... shrapnel's even more erratic.

Sure enough. But if I don't believe I'll make it, there's no point in trying. Didn't you have a teacher like that in school?

"Oh, it really doesn't matter if you learn or not, because you're all going to die in a nuclear war before you're twenty."

SHE will be the first one against the wall.

And a large number of the females in my school would say, "Oh, she's so cool! I want to be like her!"

You want to be a fat, pachoulli-soaked hippy in a shapeless hemp dress with sunken eyes from too much dope, boasting of your brother who fled to Canada and then killed himself as a "real" war hero?

I hope most of them grew out of it. I've never been back.

 

[cuchulainn]

madmike: "Oh, it really doesn't matter if you learn or not, because you're all going to die in a nuclear war before you're twenty."

Who said anything about not trying? Like I said, the odds are with you, but it seems like hubris to insist you won't die. Hubris will get you killed just as fast as hopelessness.

In war, the survivors typically find that healthy middle ground between hubris and hopelessness … or they’re just lucky idiots.

Yeah, yeah, I know, you're simply envisioning the ball going through the basket, making it more likely. The problem is that most of our would-be on-line revolutionaries don't even consider the consequences, being too busy focusing on a fantasy of future glory. The adolescents need to be reminded of reality once in awhile. That's my job here

madmike: I hope most of them grew out of it.

So do I. I also hope their opposites, the boys who fantasized about their future war heroics, grew out of it too -- but reading many threads on THR, I often doubt it.

I'm quite sure there are folks out there ready and able to bring revolution, but they aren't the juveniles fantasizing about it on internet bulletin boards.

 

[madmike]

I'm too old to start a revolution.

But I'll gladly make a few bucks outfitting it, then cheer it on.

 

[cuchulainn]

madmike: I'm too old to start a revolution.

But I'll gladly make a few bucks outfitting it, then cheer it on.

Oh, so that's how you plan to survive it -- from Dr. No's island hideaway.

 

[madmike]

I've picked out a lovely, remote, tropical island I can lease cheap, with a goodly defensive perimeter of mangroves and salt water crocodiles. I'll be turning it into a resort with casinos, strippers and a Class III weapons range.

All you have to do now is convince your boss it's the ideal place for a tax-deductible seminar and junket, and I stand ready to host you, speak of Ze RevoloooooSHUN! and aftermath, and take you back to the mainland airport aboard my private yacht.

"Army? My employees and guests ARE the army!"

 

[cuchulainn]

madmike: I stand ready to host you, speak of Ze RevoloooooSHUN! and aftermath

As long as you put Verwirrung, Zweitracht, Unordung, Beamtenherrschaft, and Grummet all in the proper perspective.
fnord

madmike: ... and take you back to the mainland airport aboard my private yacht.

I'm not falling for that. The first thing they taught me in spy school was never to hitch a ride on the yacht of a island-leasing, revolution financier, especially one with a fluffy cat.

The range sounds like fun, though.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Those who speak of overthrowing the govenment may call themselves patriots, but any way you want to look at it, it is treason and the folks are traitors.

 

[madmike]

Treason never prospers.

Why not?

If it prospers, none dare call it treason.

And there IS a line between free speech and treason. "I'd like to see X dead" is free expression. "I am going out to kill X" is a threat and actionable. "Let's you and me stockpile weapons and plan to kill X on Tuesday" breaks the law, becomes conspiracy, and can be treason if the intent is to overthrow the government.

Wishing a plague would wipe out the membership of DU, your Statehouse or Congress isn't treason. Just fantasy.

No, no, Cuch, the thing to watch out for is travel agents. They have no need to know if you have skill in jungle warfare.

 

[cuchulainn]

madmike: No, no, Cuch, the thing to watch out for is travel agents. They have no need to know if you have skill in jungle warfare.

But she said needed to know for the Adventure Tour that leaves the hotel every Tuesday morning at 7:00 sharp ... well, as sharp as can be expected in the islands, maybe 7:15 or so if the driver of the van had too many Mai Tais the night before.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I can't believe this thread is alive again...

Will you be serving any of this during your island seminars?

 

[Michael Courtney]

It is always helpful to keep the true meaning and purpose of the 2nd amendment in the conversation.

Pretending that the 2nd amendment isn't about overthrowing a tyrranical government isn't just harmful, it is dishonest.

Michael Courtney

 

[madmike]

Nah, more likely Scotch and Tequila.

Gunpowder and alcohol.