REVOLUTION! ... or what? (Vanity)

Lazamataz ^ | 12/24/2010 | By Lazamataz

[Lazamataz]

Let's face it: We are losing against the forces of Socialism and Communism.

Over the course of the last 100 years, we have gone from a purely capitalist society, to one slowly working through the throes of communization. The New Deal; the seizure of privately held gold; The War on Poverty / Drugs / Whatever; Social Security; Medicaid and Medicare; the abuse of Eminent Domain; the creation of the EPA, EEOC, FCC, NEA, CPB, and a myriad number of other barely-accountable agencies -- these have been the slow ratcheting-up of the forces of Socialistic control.

It has taken generations, and we now stand on the precipice of the full realization of the Socialists desires: Forceful control of the citizenry -- from cradle to grave -- and the destruction of wealth and the middle class, with an emphasis to collectivizing that wealth in the hands of government.

So, it is obvious that it is WELL PAST Claire Wolfe's popular admonition: "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." It is, indeed, past time to shoot.

However, this is not America circa 1776. The things that may have worked then cannot work now. This is not even America circa 1968, whereinwhich only marginally violent 'social force' was useful.

Force is an odd bird, today. Let us consider the range of options available to the resistor:

1. Somewhat-organized brigades of irregulars: Frankly, the best you could hold to field would be barely-trained irregulars with very poor C3 (Command, Control and Communications). If you could even assemble them, the irregulars would be put down quickly by professional military and police combinations. Armed with over-the-horizon technology, devastating missile technology, and unmanned drones, you'd never see it coming, and as a heat source, you'd stand out in the wilderness like a lightbulb.
   
   Okay, that won't work too well. The armed rebellion seen in 1776 won't work today. Well then, how about if you convinced a great number of military elements to desert and join our cause?
   
   
2. Professional Military Crossover: You'd get some takers, no question. We still have patriotic people in the military. But, they would be stripped of command and control machinery and the best weaponry. They would be a good adjunct and advisor group to irregulars, but they would not have the true power of the geniune military. They, too, would be crushed.
   
   Well, then, there is always the emulation of successful cell-groups as practiced in Islamic circles, or as practiced in the resistances of occupied countries since the 1900's. Let's look at that:
   
   
3. Leaderless Cell-based Resistance: These are routinely branded as terrorists, and are treated as non-citizen combatants, replete with the stripping of civil liberties, etcetera. Monitoriing and surviellance (especially network link-analysis) makes them relatively ineffective in this very-modern, very-computerized society, since any code you define would be immediately cracked, and patterns of contact are very observable. Further, what mischief would you make, without garnering negative publicity?
   
   Clearly a non-starter. Let's look, then, at the left's strategy of mass demonstrations in the 1960's.
   
   
4. Mass Demonstrations: There are now very effective non-lethal counters to this form of resistance. From the microwave-emitter to much-more-potent pepper-sprays to the sound-caster, there are ways to effectively break up a demonstration without actually killing or maiming people, and thusly the government garners no 'Kent State'-style negative publicity, with the concurrent changing of the public's mood.

Ok. Looks like direct confrontation would be a poor option. The form of tyranny we most likely face, is what I call the Soft Tyranny. It isn't like Stalin starving his Ukranian foes. It isn't like Hitler rounding up his hated Jews for orderly disposal. It isn't like Pol Pot lining up the town leaders for summary execution on the spot. It, instead, consists of a low-level bureaucrat coming over and fining you $25.00 because you are using the wrong kind of light bulb. Most students of history see that this (genocide and mass killings) are not the most effective form of control. The most effective form of control is the small regulation and the tiny civil fine. Those tend to make people behave 'correctly'.

One important caveat: If the governmental parties are NOT students of that history, then every thug they sent to round up and kill one of us, obviously, should be liquidated.

Again: giventoday's society, you are much more likely to see a soft tyranny, what are the most effective tools?

The answer is clear: Emulate the success of the left.

Widespread infiltration and the changing of the public's mind: To do this, you must educate. Free Republic is one such form of education, but it's reach is limited. The goal is to train millions of youth. Homeschoolers have a chance to do this, also, perhaps groups such as the Boy Scouts and other social groups. Here, you can educate the minds meaningfully.

Maybe even reach the immigrant population, meaningfully. Deradicalize the La Reconquistas if possible, and show them the merits of freedom and the ways to defeat - by law - government control.

Install more journalists. Train them and send them out.

Get into more churches.

Turn to social media.

Launch more conservative blogs and websites.

The best weapon against communism and socialism is truth, imparted slowly and over a generation. They have two generations on us, so we won't be alive to see the fruits of our labor.

But labor, we must.

[semantic]

I must say, I think a lot of you guys are over-thinking this process. I think it is based on your starting presumption that the left views the US as worth keeping.

But what if it isn't - at least for their purposes? That is, what if the remaining tax base, productive economy and overall military capabilities are no longer sufficient to provide them with the level of control & power they seek?

In other words, what if they believe there are other, greener pastures in which to nourish and advance a new corrupt kleptocracy? If this were the the case, then wouldn't they cede the dried, spent husk to those who still valued it?

Consider the last scene in the Road Warrior. The pilgrims sneak out, finally leaving the refinery to the thugs, who then triumphantly storm the facility just in time to experience their reward.

I know the analogy is flawed, in that in our case, the bad guys are those fleeing, leaving the flaming wreck to the rest of us. But, consider its application.

We have been blued, screwed & tattooed. What does a player do with a loose, stupid chick who is no longer attractive and/or interesting? Do they fight to retain the beat 'ho, or do they dump her and move on to something newer & prettier?

[backwoods-engineer]

A good think piece, Laz. Whatever we do, we should consider the long-term ramifications. But we must do something quickly; I fear we don’t have even another generation before totalitarianism.

[The Duke]

Infiltration and incrementalism....yeah,just like they’ve been doing! Excellent idea!

Well, there are some issues with that...

• The approach is too slow
• Conservatives are nicer and more tolerant than leftists - they will work hard to crush any such efforts

My own suggestion is forming a new "virtual" nation that transcends national borders. Participants in this effort then steer opportunity to one another, and provide support to the few places (such as Honduras) that still value freedom.

[Leaning Right]

You wrote: “Then you are saying you’d be loyal to the government no matter what they did, as long as “elections” were held? At what point would you consider the government to be illegitimate?”

That’s a tough one. If you respect the Constitution, you have to respect, and accept, majority rule.

If the majority, through their elected representatives, wants something that I despise, I must accept it. Or I can peacefully try to change it via the next election.

But there are two exceptions to this. Suppose that the majority wants something that is unconstitutional and is a clear and present danger. Then what?

I have no easy answer here, except to say that many folks cry “clear and present danger” too easily, when in actually the next election could solve the problem if the majority wanted.

The second exception is the one you noted: blatant voter fraud. Again, I have no easy answer there. Widespread and continuous voter fraud really is something that could bring down the Republic.

[The Comedian]

Join your local Democrat Party.

I'm serious. First, you will learn who is doing what where.

Then, you will be able to shift things in oh-so-subtle ways.

You can decide if you want to reform the Democrats in your midst, or run them off a cliff.

Operation Hyper-Chaos.

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[UnwashedPeasant]

"Secession is the answer"

Yes! Below is a map made by socialists after the John Kerry emasculating loss in 2004. Many of the socialist want secession too. We are already two separate peoples. It would be like when Norway and Sweden split in two: no big deal.

[Southack]

While it is true that the Left found ways to expand Government at every step, the Left has run into an unplanned and unexpected (for them) problem: funding.

If you look at the UK 40 years ago, it was then in the position of being overwhelmed by bureaucratic overmanagement as is the U.S. today.

...and the UK was broke. Along came Thatcher to make the mandatory reforms, and the socialistic behemoth was rolled back across Britain.

Likewise, U.S. cities, counties, states, and the federal government are bumping up against Britain’s 1970’s-era funding issues.

You see, government can only grow so large compared to the private sector...at which point poverty sets in at government and private levels alike.

So there is a natural limit to the expansion of Socialism. China didn’t get rich by remaining orthodox communist, after all!

The U.S. has advantages today that China and the UK did not, too. For one thing, private citizens have won the tax cut debate and have won the firearm ownership debate.

OK, granted, we’re losing the gay rights debate, but really, that’s pretty trivial in the grand scheme of things so long as we win the eventual battle over abortion being banned.

Next, we’ve got to fight and win the spending debate...but fiscal reality is on our side (because spending cuts *must* be made as there simply isn’t enough wealth to pay for all of the current level of promises for pensions and benefits).

Anyway, time is on our side. Fiscal reality is on our side. Facts are on our side. Historical inevitability is on our side.

No need to be impatient. It’s OK if California goes broke first before we restore fiscal sanity. Really. It’s OK if union goons see their pension funds fail first before we restore fiscal sanity.

We’ll live.

[waterhill]

Bang!

My FRiend, I do believe that You have the answer...

Merry Christmas to All...

[Leaning Right]

Interesting map. I would however like a bit more of Canada (for fishing purposes).

[Natural Born 54]

I agree. Efforts should be concentrated at the state level to make sure there are people in office who have the guts to do what is necessary. States need to adapt an old slogan to our new situation. “Just say ‘NO’” to the Feds. And mean it.

[waterhill]

Yeah, I think so too ( We’ll live )

It is just gonna suck in the meantime...

[Natural Born 54]

“Some people believe that armed citizens don’t stand a chance against an army, especially one as powerful as USA. This is the BS lie all governments around the world want you to believe, but the reality is very different.

If every block in the country, USA for example, has a dozen men with fire arms, the one that doesn’t stand a chance is the military force. It’s the perfect guerrilla setup, and a general’s worst nightmare.

You can’t nuke or level every block. You can’t arrest the entire country. The “fighters” are already armed, fed, spread out, integrated and infiltrated into the military and government branches. It’s impossible to win.”

Fernando Ferfal Aguirre (SURVIVING THE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE )

[B4Ranch]

IMO, it should be common knowledge where their city, state and federal officials, the county bureaucrats and local and federal police officers live, every single one of them!

It is not difficult to make someone live in fear for their lives as many of you already know. Making our elected local, county, state or federal officials acutely aware of that feeling is not a popular idea amongst the posters on this thread but having that taste in your mouth is not one quickly forgotten. Don’t go after them in their protected offices when their families are as vulnerable as our are.

If our LEO’s or military troops under the orders of our elected local, county, state or federal officials ever administer violent treatment to US citizens then it should be returned in equal force to their superiors families.

I promise you that a single bullet through the kitchen window of the Mayors house will make for an excited dinner conversation. The Mayor will then understand exactly what he did when he ordered violence against his townspeople.

The Chief of Police’s wife isn’t immune from explaining to her husband what a wonderful job he’s doing if her home receives a copper jacketed message through her front door or bedroom wall.

There is no need to go after the street level officers, their bosses are the ones who issue the orders and they should be the ones to receive the 1200+ foot per second message.

[Lazamataz]

More than a few people have pointed out that the insurgency of 15,000,000 (consider that only 5% would participate) beats the 2,000,000-man army that would be mustered against the insurgents -- in full violation of Posse Comatitus -- and that the numeric superiority would prevail.

Perhaps. Hope we never need to find out. Never forget, though, that Domestic Insurgency lacks the force-multipliers that the professional army has.

[B4Ranch]

Janet Napolitano is no David Betrayus. Petreaus

[Lazamataz]

Your ideas, as usual, have merit. However, I would point out that the required patience you advise, has historically been two generations (the USSR) or more (China)... and even in both those cases, the subsequent regime is substandard. Russia has its Kleptocracy, and China, it's Totalitarian Capitalism.

Our case may differ than the above two, with the dollar as likely as it is to collapse and fall as it is. We have a great dice-throw ahead of us. I give it 2 to 10 years before a serious collapse in a dollar -- which represents and backs our unsustainable debt level.

Will it be back to true Capitalism, or something else?

It is more likely to be Capitalism and a return to the Constitution, but only if we Infiltrate and Educate.

[Lazamataz]

Thank you, dear sir.

[B4Ranch]

>>While it is true that the Left found ways to expand Government at every step,<<

Head stuck? Bush was the one who formed the Department of Homeland Security and in doing so almost DOUBLED the size of the Feds in DC. Yes, he ran on the Right, was elected by the Right but his zealous spending reminded me of the current maniac we have from the Left.

[Lazamataz]

Well Lazz's article was in opposition to armed action

Correction: I am ambivilent to armed action. If it would be more effective, I'd be for it. It just looks less effective, so I am not.

I do retain one caveat: Effective or not, if the thugs come bringing violence proactively, to your home or neighborhood, fire at will. Alexander Solzhenitsyn had it right.

[Southack]

You’re an odd bird, though. All hat, no cattle...lots of barking, little bite.

People aren’t lining up city streets to be your friend, and you wouldn’t want them if they did (which they won’t).

Which is to say, catering to someone so division and bitter isn’t going to help any large-scale political movement.