Ive been critical of VDH in the past but I say give credit where credit is due.
You’re kind of in a trashy mood today aren’t you? It’s one thing to criticize the author but it’s another to laugh at me for praising it.
I’m pretty sure you’re a jerk.
For example, what is the difference between mutiny and rebellion? Is there one, or is it merely a question of semantics? The reason I ask, is what would be the appropriate response if the military was engaged in mutiny? Would it be considered treason, insurrection, or just a disagreement that needed to be resolved via appropriate channels?
OK, back to the original question: if certain federal departments are in essence engaged in insurrection, why should the response be any different than one directed at a mutiny in the military? Final question - if the federal and/or respective state governments did no act in a forceful manner towards either, what message would be sent to the conspirators?
This why anything other than a declaration of insurrection taking place in certain departments and states just means the opposition won. Since that's the case, what's the point of some long, contemplative essay on what's been obvious to anyone with clue for awhile now?
VDH et al are just empty voices fading into the past. The future is much, much more radical.