Having slept, and awakening if not refreshed at least somewhat rested, I'd like to reply to not just a few individual posters but also address some of the larger and more significant memes and attitudes that the Waco incident bestirs amongst the citizenry, its guards, its would-be owners and its rebellious insurrectionists. As a part of that, it is good to recognize that there's also a community here at Free Republic that's worth preserving.
There's a lot of value here, and it is a quintessentially American value and practice: annoyed, blunt bickering without violence. We settle our internal differences, for the most part, with words and votes in this country rather than open gunfire and ideologically driven acts of murder. It's a good system, and one that has served us well as a people.
But all sides have to agree to that practice.
That includes the agents and officers of the State who draw their power and authority
from us.
Very simply put, there are enough clear indicators that the State is in breach of contract and no longer abides by the terms; that the consent of the people to be governed by that power, has been withdrawn by painful and ugly lessons that teach our people that this breach of contract has, truly, been effected.
We - and I mean all of us - have reached a very bad place. The guards of our security have become the guards that control, and
Juvenal's quis custodiet ipsos custodes is no longer a question of social theory but an active one of operational military planning among the people.
That is not hyperbole. The Bundy Ranch incident is notable not merely for its successful use of armed force to create
surrender on the part of the State - it also demonstrated effective and most importantly
successful military operations. Best of all, there was no loss of life.
That's textbook.
There are some very, very smart and grimly organized men who believe with their entire spirit that freedom is better than slavery; that the Leviathan is truly uncoiled and on the rampage; and that Death is not the worst of evils.
I said before this is a
low intensity conflict across the country, and I did not use those words lightly.
There are judged to be at least 50,000 and potentially
as many as 80,000 Special Weapons and Tactics raids in the United States each year. We all know the saga of kicked in doors and shouted orders at midnight and the shootings and rounding up of families.
There is now no tangible difference between light infantry troops in a hostile zone of occupation and law enforcement response. The uniforms, the equipment, the tactics and the purpose - domination and forced obedience to insure preservation of State
lese majesty and authority rather than the will of the local communities - is terrifying.
That terror is purposeful, and deliberate.
And we know it. We feel it. We think about it, and we believe it.
Because we see it.
That's one of the reasons why Waco is, for so many people, a watershed event. It's not simply a case of undesirable elements, blended in with neutrals and innocents, getting Texas-style justice that they should have expected. There are those who do feel that way. I understand that perspective. In another time, another generation, it might have been absorbable and digestible and even if still horrific, perhaps passable within that narrow framework. I don't say that's right, just that it is what it is. The events of May 17th of this year at the Twin Peaks restaurant in Waco, Texas are unfortunately and very disturbingly nestled within a larger change of the times and serve as a crescendo of the current swells of totalitarianism that are unsettling the country and our people.
"Criminal bike gang" is simply a propaganda meme. Is there a such thing as a criminal bike gang? Yes, in the same way that there are "assault weapons" or "domestic extremists".
It's propaganda labeling, designed to stigmatize and defeat. Or, if you like, "pick, personalize, polarize and ridicule".
Same stuff.
A healthier and more honest way to think of it is to ask some more searching questions of broader utility and implication, and consider those implications as they intersect; and how exponential impact arises from those intersections.
Are three piece patch motorcycle clubs a threat to the security of the State?
Yes, they are. They consist of men who openly embrace the risk of sudden, unpredictable and
violent death as an inherent transactional cost of the exhilaration and boundless joy of
real freedom.
Who place consistency of unit cohesion and loyalty over not just mere individuality but also over the more gut level human emotions of fear and greed and other basal reactions.
They are armed, and the highest archetype of the culture is the
outlaw, who does not apologize for the hard and terrible sacrifices of a true type of freedom that is quintessentially American.
Are Oathkeepers and Three Percenters a threat to the security of the State?
Yes, they are. By their very existence they are a finger of harsh accusation pointed at State legitimacy, an open and deadly warning that conscience trumps command authority. That within the midst of the State is the patient and awakened seed of its own death, should it trespass bounds that violate the oaths of men who take those oaths seriously.
They are not merely armed and trained and coordinated - they are also nestled deep within the bowels and neurons and sinews and perceptions of the Leviathan, already mestastized, poised and watching and not forgiving.
Are veterans a threat to the security of the State?
There are millions of them. They all swore an oath, even if so many of them are hurting and bitter and lied to and withdrawn, wounded, underneath the often thin blankets of family and community and lacking the needed morale of
leadership in the nation to enable them to feel that somehow the deaths of their brothers in Fallujah and Ramadi and other savage places at least isn't being openly spit on through the incomprehensibly stupid and rudderless idiocy of the ideologists that helm the ship of State.
What is the great fear?
What tyrants always fear; what the State always fears. Effective coalescing of these kinds of existential threats, under motivating circumstances, with leadership that drives to further goals than those of the moment.
We are no longer in Claire Wolfe's
awkward stage.
We're now just waiting for
Von Steubens to arrive, and for the dykes to breach, the dams give way, and the ship of State to be rudderless as the naked Blighs on the foredeck are recognized as having lost grasp of the tiller.
It is a really ripe time.
It is not a surprise to me that the officers of tyranny are afraid. They have lost the initiative, and they have lost control of the crest of the imagination of the people.
That's how it works.
What, really, is the real question that each shuddering overthrow of the State must ask?
It's a simple one, but critical.
Who is able and willing to shoot back?
Bikers are. Three piece patch holders will go first.
Oathkeepers are. Three Percenters will go first.
Veterans are. They will coalesce around insurgent first responders.
(And as an aside, "oppositionally defiant veterans" will probably catch on in some form or another, just like "microaggressions" has.)
The mass of the people are, once there's enough hope instead of despair and they have decided in the immutable wisdom of humans to become a
crowd, instead of a group.
Weirdly, and kind of interestingly, it follows a path identical to the emergence of filamentary structures. Just an odd way the universe seems to arrange itself in this sort of thing when you look at infection and pivots and initiative and systemic collapse. (Compare
here,
here and
here for an example of what I refer to.)
It all comes down to some really odd and funny stuff sometimes. The above groups and their fundamental ideologies and skills and motivations are really just ingredients. It's the spark of imagination that really lights the fire. Sometimes that spark is silly on the surface, like make believe Indians throwing tea out of boats. Or The Donald making outrageously true, and truly outrageous, statements and not backing down. Or nine arrogant old people in black robes declaring that all of human history is wrong, because well
haters.
Like I said, it's an interesting time. Yes, I know that's an old curse to fling. But like an honest biker would say...
DILLIGAF. And it is what it is.
Just my $.02.
Gentlemen, start your engines. I'll see you on the road.
Let's keep it shiny side up out there.
Much love to my fellow Americans,
- RT "Asskiller"
Yeah, that's an actual road name. Has to do with livestock and midnight T-boning at speed. Broken wings, and all that. But that's a story for another time."There are some very, very smart and grimly organized men who believe with their entire spirit that freedom is better than slavery; that the Leviathan is truly uncoiled and on the rampage; and that Death is not the worst of evils." How interesting and timely that you should post that paraphrase in your thoughtful and right-on-point #172!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As my FRName implies, this Texan was "voluntarily exiled" in the liberal State immediately south of New Hampshire for two decades, and I grew to admire NH's ubiquitously-visible motto, "Live Free or Die!".
Serendipitously, two of my granddaughters just returned from a visit to New Hampshire, (and Concord, its capital) and, while there, they learned (and, then, conveyed to me on their return to Texas) the complete quotation from which the NH motto is taken.
Per the NH State law establishing the motto (emphases mine...):
State Motto. The words "Live Free or Die," written by General John Stark, July 31, 1809, shall be the official motto of the state. It was the 1945 Legislature that gave New Hampshire its official motto and emblem, as World War II approached a successful end.
The motto became "Live Free Or Die," as once voiced by General John Stark, the state’s most distinguished hero of the Revolutionary War, and the world famous Old Man of the Mountain was voted the official state emblem.
The motto was part of a volunteer toast which General Stark sent to his wartime comrades, in which he declined an invitation to head up a 32nd anniversary reunion of the 1777 Battle of Bennington in Vermont, because of poor health. The toast said in full: "Live Free Or Die; Death Is Not The Worst of Evils." The following year, a similar invitation (also declined) said: "The toast, sir, which you sent us in 1809 will continue to vibrate with unceasing pleasure in our ears,
"Live Free Or Die;
Death Is Not The Worst Of Evils."
New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated (RSA) 3:1, 8 Anderson, Leon. History. Manual for the General Court 1981. Moore, Howard Parker. A Life of General John Stark of New Hampshire. Howard Parker Moore author and publisher, c.1949.
That full motto should serve well all those who love our Constitution (whether they be Oathkeepers, Veterans, or, simply Patriotic Americans) and who abhor the reprehensible regime which is currently destroying our beloved Nation.
As for me, as a Texan, my feelings toward my State are expressed in my Tagline, below.
And, wherever in our Nation I go, my personal motto can be expressed with this 1835 Texian flag:
Nicely done, Sir!
"Live Free Or Die;
Death Is Not The Worst Of Evils."
Good write-up Robert.
I think one thing you're missing though, is that the Powers That Be have managed, through careful indoctrination and propaganda efforts, to just about evenly split this country right in half. It's not the old north/south divide, and is not really even a rural/city split, though that is closer to the mark than most. Rather, it is a split of ideologies and worldviews. Try talking to a diehard leftist about just about anything, and you'll see that they really do not live in the same reality that you do.
To them, their world and perceptions make complete sense, just like yours do to you. Even something as basic as language has been twisted to fit the leftist agenda. We see a little bleed-over of this with made up concepts like "microagression", and "white privilege", but most of us really don't see the whole of it, unless we're unfortunate enough to be an unwilling prisoner in a leftist stronghold. Because they use and attach different meanings to common words, they will draw entirely different, and to us, non-sensical conclusions given the same set of facts, or the same description of different events.
That's one of the things that is going to cause the most problems when we truely leave the 'awkward stage', because both 'sides' see this from such grossly different perspectives. I've seen many conservatives write about the "us having all the guns" because the leftists are such ardent gun-control activists. Well, that's not really the case at all. As in so many things, what they really mean when they say they want to get guns off the street, is not that they want to be disarmed. What they really mean is they want to take guns away from the wrong people (in their mind) - mostly that's us, and minorities, because of the racism their worldview is so thoroughly steeped in.
Take a look at some "anarchist" sites, and you'll see them talking about being armed up to the teeth, and the wilder bunches are really into blowing things up. This has been true for a long time. (Weathermen anyone?)
For the establishment, things get really tricky. While the leftists will use the full power of the state to destroy any opposition to their policies, no matter how small, their more militant brethren are really more interested in chaos than anything else. So, they'll have no problem at all with attacking infrastructure elements, and LE or military types when they can get away with it, they'd take it amiss if folks started popping off EPA, BATFags, or any of the favored stalinists agencies of the left as seen in Unintended Consequences.
Things will get right interesting when everything finally falls into the crapper. The Feral government has done a pretty good job protecting themselves so far, but when things really devolve, the video cameras they've placed everywere to monitor and control things aren't really going to be especially useful for them.
Some of this is spoken to in a vanity I posted a while back: Police and Society in America
We're in for interesting times, and I don't know how it will all shake out in the end.
