Civil Disobedience

View Latest Activity

Home Forums Rightful Liberty Civil Disobedience

Viewing 66 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #87277
      Joe (G.W.N.S.)
      Moderator

        civil disobedience
        noun
        : refusal to obey laws as a way of forcing the government to do or change something
        http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civil disobedience

        Some excerpts from:
        Civil disobedience
        Written by: The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica
        http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/119219/civil-disobedience

        “Civil disobedience is a symbolic or ritualistic violation of the law rather than a rejection of the system as a whole. The civil disobedient, finding legitimate avenues of change blocked or nonexistent, feels obligated by a higher, extralegal principle to break some specific law.”

        “The principle of civil disobedience has achieved some standing in international law through the war crime trials at Nürnberg after World War II, which affirmed the principle that an individual may, under certain circumstances, be held accountable for failure to break the laws of his country.”

        I’ve attached a PDF copy of Civil Disobedience By Henry David Thoreau which I highly recommend.
        http://www.ibiblio.org/ebooks/Thoreau/Civil Disobedience.pdf

        Here is a Wall Street Journal article “Regulation Run Amok—And How to Fight Back” dated May 11, 2015.
        http://www.wsj.com/articles/regulation-run-amokand-how-to-fight-back-1431099256

        From The Washington Post, The case for conservative civil disobedience.
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2015/05/06/the-case-for-conservative-civil-disobedience/

        I am not going to recommend any course of action regarding specific acts of Civil Disobedience, this is up to the individual to decide based on his or her conscience.

        We have all seen the acts carried out by many recently in the name of the 2nd Amendment, from armed protest, blatant violation of laws at these protests, and failure to comply with various Laws such as in New York and Connecticut.

        I believe this to be something for consideration by each of us.

        Know what you may be getting yourself into before you act in order to avoid any ignorance of the price to be paid.

      • #87278
        Corvette
        Participant

          Great Link!!

          Thank you! :good:

        • #87279
          Corvette
          Participant
          • #87280
            D Close
            Moderator

              Excellent topic. Thank you. See also Romans 13:1 for the counter-argument. Resistance is something some people have a hard time with, I think. Most of us are not habitual and intentional lawbreakers. Now, we haven’t much choice.

            • #87281
              Joe (G.W.N.S.)
              Moderator

                Interesting site and information A Freeman. :good:

                Will take some time to go over it all.

                I believe we are beginning to see this type of response and more will follow.

                It’s the next logical step in the fight for Rightful Liberty and a necessary one, we must truly exhaust all nonviolent options for us to have legitimacy in the quest for true Rightful Liberty.

              • #87282
                Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                Moderator

                  D Close wrote:
                  “Excellent topic. Thank you. See also Romans 13:1 for the counter-argument. Resistance is something some people have a hard time with, I think. Most of us are not habitual and intentional lawbreakers. Now, we haven’t much choice.”

                  Here is a column by Chuck Baldwin:

                  “It seems that every time someone such as myself attempts to encourage our Christian brothers and sisters to resist an unconstitutional or otherwise reprehensible government policy, we hear the retort, “What about Romans Chapter 13? We Christians must submit to government. Any government. Read your Bible, and leave me alone.” Or words to that effect.

                  No doubt, some who use this argument are sincere. They are only repeating what they have heard their pastor and other religious leaders say. On the other hand, let’s be honest enough to admit that some who use this argument are just plain lazy, apathetic, and indifferent. And Romans 13 is their escape from responsibility. I suspect this is the much larger group, by the way.

                  Nevertheless, for the benefit of those who are sincere (but obviously misinformed), let’s briefly examine Romans Chapter 13. I quote Romans Chapter 13, verses 1 through 7, from the Authorized King James text:

                  “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.”

                  Do our Christian friends who use these verses to teach that we should not oppose President Bush or any other political leader really believe that civil magistrates have unlimited authority to do anything they want without opposition? I doubt whether they truly believe that.

                  For example, what if our President decided to resurrect the old monarchal custom of Jus Primae Noctis (Law of First Night)? That was the old medieval custom when the king claimed the right to sleep with a subject’s bride on the first night of their marriage. Would our sincere Christian brethren sheepishly say, “Romans Chapter 13 says we must submit to the government”? I think not. And would any of us respect any man who would submit to such a law?

                  So, there are limits to authority. A father has authority in his home, but does this give him power to abuse his wife and children? Of course not. An employer has authority on the job, but does this give him power to control the private lives of his employees? No. A pastor has overseer authority in the church, but does this give him power to tell employers in his church how to run their businesses? Of course not. All human authority is limited in nature. No man has unlimited authority over the lives of other men. (Lordship and Sovereignty is the exclusive domain of Jesus Christ.)

                  By the same token, a civil magistrate has authority in civil matters, but his authority is limited and defined. Observe that Romans Chapter 13 clearly limits the authority of civil government by strictly defining its purpose: “For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil . . . For he is the minister of God to thee for good . . . for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”

                  Notice that civil government must not be a “terror to good works.” It has no power or authority to terrorize good works or good people. God never gave it that authority. And any government that oversteps that divine boundary has no divine authority or protection.

                  Civil government is a “minister of God to thee for good.” It is a not a minister of God for evil. Civil magistrates have a divine duty to “execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” They have no authority to execute wrath upon him that doeth good. None. Zilch. Zero. And anyone who says they do is lying. So, even in the midst of telling Christians to submit to civil authority, Romans Chapter 13 limits the power and reach of civil authority.

                  Did Moses violate God’s principle of submission to authority when he killed the Egyptian taskmaster in defense of his fellow Hebrew? Did Elijah violate God’s principle of submission to authority when he openly challenged Ahab and Jezebel? Did David violate God’s principle of submission to authority when he refused to surrender to Saul’s troops? Did Daniel violate God’s principle of submission to authority when he disobeyed the king’s law to not pray audibly to God? Did the three Hebrew children violate God’s principle of submission to authority when they refused to bow to the image of the state? Did John the Baptist violate God’s principle of submission to authority when he publicly scolded King Herod for his infidelity? Did Simon Peter and the other Apostles violate God’s principle of submission to authority when they refused to stop preaching on the streets of Jerusalem? Did Paul violate God’s principle of submission to authority when he refused to obey those authorities who demanded that he abandon his missionary work? In fact, Paul spent almost as much time in jail as he did out of jail.

                  Remember that every apostle of Christ (except John) was killed by hostile civil authorities opposed to their endeavors. Christians throughout church history were imprisoned, tortured, or killed by civil authorities of all stripes for refusing to submit to their various laws and prohibitions. Did all of these Christian martyrs violate God’s principle of submission to authority?

                  So, even the great prophets, apostles, and writers of the Bible (including the writer of Romans Chapter 13) understood that human authority–even civil authority–is limited.

                  Plus, Paul makes it clear that our submission to civil authority must be predicated on more than fear of governmental retaliation. Notice, he said, “Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.” Meaning, our obedience to civil authority is more than just “because they said so.” It is also a matter of conscience. This means we must think and reason for ourselves regarding the justness and rightness of our government’s laws. Obedience is not automatic or robotic. It is a result of both rational deliberation and moral approbation.

                  Therefore, there are times when civil authority may need to be resisted. Either governmental abuse of power or the violation of conscience (or both) could precipitate civil disobedience. Of course, how and when we decide to resist civil authority is an entirely separate issue. And I will reserve that discussion for another time.

                  Beyond that, we in the United States of America do not live under a monarchy. We have no king. There is no single governing official in this country. America’s “supreme Law” does not rest with any man or any group of men. America’s “supreme Law” does not rest with the President, the Congress, or even the Supreme Court. In America, the U.S. Constitution is the “supreme Law of the Land.” Under our laws, every governing official publicly promises to submit to the Constitution of the United States. Do readers understand the significance of this distinction? I hope so.

                  This means that in America the “higher powers” are not the men who occupy elected office, they are the tenets and principles set forth in the U.S. Constitution. Under our laws and form of government, it is the duty of every citizen, including our elected officials, to obey the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, this is how Romans Chapter 13 reads to Americans:

                  “Let every soul be subject unto the [U.S. Constitution.] For there is no [Constitution] but of God: the [Constitution] that be [is] ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the [Constitution], resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For [the Constitution is] not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the [Constitution]? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For [the Constitution] is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for [the Constitution] beareth not the sword in vain: for [the Constitution] is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For this cause pay ye tribute also: for [the Constitution is] God’s minister, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.”

                  Dear Christian friend, the above is exactly the proper understanding of our responsibility to civil authority in these United States, as per the teaching of Romans Chapter 13.

                  Furthermore, Christians, above all people, should desire that their elected representatives submit to the Constitution, because it is constitutional government that has done more to protect Christian liberty than any governing document ever devised by man. As I have noted before in this column (See: http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2005/cbarchive_20050630.html ), Biblical principles form the foundation of all three of America’s founding documents: The Declaration of Independence, The U.S. Constitution, and The Bill of Rights.

                  As a result, Christians in America (for the most part) have not had to face the painful decision to “obey God rather than men” and defy their civil authorities.

                  The problem in America today is that we have allowed our political leaders to violate their oaths of office and to ignore, and blatantly disobey, the “supreme Law of the Land,” the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, if we truly believe Romans Chapter 13, we will insist and demand that our civil magistrates submit to the U.S. Constitution.

                  Now, how many of us Christians are going to truly obey Romans Chapter 13?

                  © Chuck Baldwin”

                  I don’t agree with Chuck Baldwin on many areas, but I believe he makes an accurate interpretation of Romans 13.

                  He and his son Timothy Baldwin wrote a book called “Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission,” I haven’t read it, but suspect it’s a good to counter those that use Romans 13 as an excuse.

                  Here is the link to the books web site:
                  http://romans13truth.com/

                  My simplest argument to those that would subvert the meaning of Romans 13, is to point out that by following that interpretation.

                  The very founding of our Republic would have been in violation of God’s Will and as such forfeiting any possibility of our being Blessed by God both in the past and present!

                  God can not Bless a Nation built on the subversion of God’s Will.

                  No there are three reasons for the misinterpretation of Romans 13.

                  1. Ignorance

                  2. Cowardice

                  3. Treason

                  Pretty simple really! :yes:

                • #87283
                  D Close
                  Moderator

                    GWNS, that was exactly what I had hoped someone would post. Thank you.

                  • #87284
                    Corvette
                    Participant

                      Thanks GWNS and also for the article addressing Romans 13:1 that
                      D Close mentions.

                      Unquestioning, subservient submission to authority is a bad way to start – that always ends up in a worse place if history is a guide.

                      One needs to consider carefully the legitimacy of the authority of the state over the individual, the social contract (which is now being heavily breached by Governments in most Western countries) and the extent, duration and revocation of the consent of the governed.

                      “My country right or wrong” is a dangerous and unstable moral platform upon which to build a public polity.

                      While values and ethics do have a major role to play – specific religious ideologies are not the sole repositories of such things. e.g. the previous thread on Stoicism – which has much to commend it.

                      In terms of what is to be done, a good place to start is a solid understanding of “Systems Thinking”. It is essential knowledge for planning, making, and breaking, all kinds of stuff. (Even the ubiquitous OODA is just a mental model of a system – and can be broken.) :yes:

                    • #87285
                      Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                      Moderator

                        There is a rebirth of an old idea developing regarding Civil Disobedience, in many ways it seems uniquely American.

                        What is it?

                        Armed Civil Disobedience!

                        Many might think this is a new twist, but if we remember Lexington Green April 19, 1775 this was a perfect example of Armed Civil Disobedience.

                        If the British had turned and gone back to Boston when confronted by Captain John Parker; not very likely, but the “Shot Heard Round the World” would have been saved for another day.

                        What to date has been a stark contrast to the events at Lexington and let’s say the “Bundy Ranch” event, is the fact that Captain John Parker’s Militia was greatly outnumbered while the BLM and other LEO’s were the ones outnumbered in Nevada.

                        It would not have taken much for a fight to take place on that day of April 12, 2014 (what’s the deal with April?).

                        Obviously the stakes are quite high during any Armed Civil Disobedience event.

                        What has been quite surprising is although there have been investigations into the events of April 12, 2014 by the FBI and other LEO’s, no public action has been taking.

                        It would seem at this point that the Government is not willing to push the issue.

                        Obviously this is an numbers game, as long as the LEO’s are out numbered they seem willing to show much restraint.

                        I was also surprised at the number of hits a web search of Armed Civil Disobedience returns.

                        It will be interesting to see what’s next.

                      • #87286
                        Andrew
                        Participant

                          The LEOs may be showing restraint, but how long will the politicians? Lexington Green happened because someone goofed and pulled a trigger, the next Bundy stand-off, or the one after that, could result in the same situation and then things could get ugly fast.

                          Back in 1775 the good guys were at least somewhat organized and had some leadership with a goal and plans. I don’t quite see that today. Maybe my clearence isn’t high enough or I don’t have a need to know.

                          Interesting times we live in.

                        • #87287
                          Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                          Moderator

                            Andrew wrote:
                            “The LEOs may be showing restraint, but how long will the politicians?”

                            There are no absolutes and the restraint shown I believe has more to do with self preservation than a desire to avoid violence. Although there is also LEO’s that disagree with the methods and/or policies.

                            The politicians will have difficulty pushing for action as long as numbers are perceived to be too large.

                            I think this is the case with New York and Connecticut’s lack of dedicated attempt to enforce the new gun laws. Even if it could be done peaceably where do you put a 100,000 plus new “criminals?”

                            Andrew wrote:
                            “Back in 1775 the good guys were at least somewhat organized and had some leadership with a goal and plans. I don’t quite see that today.”

                            Based on the “I will not Comply” events in Washington State it seems organizers have tried very hard to provide organized leadership, but as you know, all it will take is one shot.

                            Anytime there is a gathering of Armed Citizens and Authorities it makes for a potential “powder keg” and like Lexington, it wouldn’t take much for it to blow.

                            Any participation in Armed Civil Disobedience must be carefully chosen with the knowledge violence could happen.

                            These are uncharted waters so to speak and it doesn’t get anymore “in your face” than Armed Civil Disobedience.

                            “Interesting times we live in.” Indeed!

                          • #87288
                            Andrew
                            Participant

                              GWNS, I can’t quote you on this stupid pad, but I agree with what you are saying about New York and Connecticut.

                              RE: powder keg, it is not beyond the realm of possibility for TPTB to use an agent provocateur to ignite the spark. When they choose to.

                            • #87289
                              Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                              Moderator

                                Andrew wrote:
                                “RE: powder keg, it is not beyond the realm of possibility for TPTB to use an agent provocateur to ignite the spark. When they choose to.”

                                I agree that is a real possibility!

                                There is a definite need for as many video recordings as possible at any such event and to keep an eye out for any suspicious behavior on all sides.

                                Let’s face it resorting to Armed Civil Disobedience is just one step below a true Rebellion. It is right on the razors edge and dangerous in the extreme!

                                It sends a potent message to TPTB, but will it be enough?

                                I don’t pretend to have many answers, but I think the “Genie is out of the Bottle” and can’t be put back.

                                Standard Civil Disobedience seems to lead to a riot type response that exceeds the response you would see at a real Baltimore Riot type event.

                                The question remains whether it can truly help?

                                If not, then what will happen if a fight broke out?

                                Would it spread or would it simmer just below the surface until next time?

                                It took over a year from Lexington to the Declaration of Independence and we don’t have anything approaching a consensus on any goals or even common ground as yet.

                                Is there any option that leads to a reversal of current Government trends?

                                Even if there isn’t a solution it would seem we must at least attempt to change things in order to maintain legitimacy.

                              • #87290
                                Andrew
                                Participant

                                  I honestly do not think things will get any better, because, imo, there are too many people out there who have no idea how the government is supposed to work. There are too many people who pay zero attention to current events, except possibly, at a local level, when those events impact them. There are too many people out there who are afflicted with “normalcy bias” and things won’t change, or if they do do change Uncle Sugar will fix it.Gives

                                  Imo, peaceful change will only come about when people can force the politicians to do the job, as intended, by the Constitution, and the lobbyists are taken completely out of the equation. What a the chances that will happen?

                                  Secession, dividing the country into different regions, comes up in some circles. If that happens, I do not think there is the proverbial snowball’s chance that it will work.

                                  I am very pessimistic, given the mood, portrayed in the media, about the state of race relations, in urban areas, and the incessant bleating for legalizing people who have zero allegiance to this country that things will turn out well in either the long or short term.

                                  Change? I suspect there will not be any change to restore what we were until after a period of unpleasantness, which will include things getting noisy, before people will wake up. Who knows?

                                • #87291
                                  HiDesertRat
                                  Participant

                                    I concur with Andrew.

                                    The Cloward-Pivens strategy is being fully implemented currently. Our ‘representatives’ have been purchased by the highest bidders (check the net worth of your representative upon entering the ‘hallowed halls’ vs now, all that gain from public salaries? I think not). The masses, for the most part, are walking zombies, not of my era, munching on human ribs, but currently they now are ‘plugged in’ to the propaganda machine, and I suspect their diet eventually will evolve from vegan to meat. Between the slow strangulation of the public education system, i.e. Common Core, attempting to obliterate critical thinking, to the insidious devaluation of our monetary system, keeping people struggling so much so, they do not or cannot lift their heads up to see what is really coming….until it is too late. What will be the result? Hmmmm……TPTB are getting the cattle cars ready. Past generation could emigrate to ???. Small world now, no place to go. Eventually it will come to a critical juncture, and soon. Realizing they have been abandoned, folks will come to the conclusion that they may not have to stand tall, but they do have to stand up. After that, comes what Yogi Berra alluded to, ‘the future ain’t what it used to be’.

                                  • #87292
                                    Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                    Moderator

                                      Yea, a lot of this is going through the motions to maintain a certain degree of legitimacy or the moral high ground.

                                      I do believe it is important in the long run.

                                      Part of this is also buying time to train and organize.

                                      For example I believe we are better off today than we were before Max created this Forum.

                                      There isn’t time to train as many as I would like, however there maybe enough time to train a core group of people that can make a difference.

                                      I suspect true change will require a extreme event or collapse, then see what can be built from there.

                                      For a Secessionist move to succeed will require a greatly weakened Federal Government, such as after the extreme event or collapse. It is difficult to imagine success without such a precipitating event.

                                      It is possible that an attempt at Secession could ultimately lead to that weakened condition, but it would be very costly to the State or Region that attempted it.

                                      Something that helps me when examining the potential hardships that may come is the fact that for all the Government hype and power, bottom line is they do not have the manpower to accomplish their goals if met with resistance.

                                      Ultimately we will do what we can and see where it leads us!

                                    • #87293
                                      Andrew
                                      Participant

                                        Secession would be a disaster, imo. Each area would be weaker than before on many levels.

                                        I agree that an extreme event, where people are shocked out of their complacency is most likely what will be needed to generate change. Positive change, not the kind foisted on us by the current junta.

                                        Along with not having the required manpower I’m here to tell you the LEO community, overall, does not have the training MV does.

                                        Kicking in doors is one thing, knowing how to move and operate in the brush is a whole different breed of cat.

                                      • #87294
                                        Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                        Moderator

                                          Here is a new article getting into Civil Disobedience.

                                          Is it Time for Civil Disobedience of Kludgeocratic Bureaucracy?By Michael Barone – June 2, 2015

                                          Excerpt:

                                          What is to be done? Citizens, says Murray, should be willing to violate laws that the ordinary person would instantly recognize as ridiculous. And deep-pocketed citizens should set up a Madison Fund, to subsidize their legal defense and pay their fines.

                                          Civil disobedience will stick in the craw of conservatives who revere law and order. Deep-pocketed donors may be repelled. And Murray admits that deciding what regulations civil disobeyers should disobey involves tricky judgment calls.

                                          But he argues that his project might not be entirely quixotic, because the nation has changed in ways not envisioned by the Progressives and New Dealers, and contrary to the predilections of the regulators at agencies like OSHA and EPA.

                                          The Progressives thought that the nation was becoming more uniform and that supposedly disinterested regulators could and should make it more so. Murray points out that the contrary is the case.

                                          The cultural uniformity that people remember from the post-World War II decades is the exception rather than the rule in American history. We were a religiously, ethnically and regionally diverse nation in James Madison’s time, Murray says, and we are once again. The uniformity temporarily imposed by shared wartime and postwar experiences is no more.

                                          In addition, the assumption that centralized regulators would have unique expertise has proven unfounded. Government bureaucracy is increasingly a kludgeocracy (a word coined by the liberal political scientist Steven Teles), mindlessly enforcing absurdly precise rules by threatening ruin upon anyone who resists.

                                          But regulators are actually thin on the ground, unequipped to deal with mass — and subsidized — civil disobedience. When a spotlight is shined on their tyrannical behavior, even courts will rebel.

                                          Case in point: In 2012, the Supreme Court in Sackett v. EPA ruled that regulators couldn’t impose a $75,000 per day fine until the agency, in its own good time, acted on a landowner’s challenge to its ruling that his landlocked two-thirds of an acre parcel was a wetland.

                                          At this point just these articles are a good start!

                                          The more people hear about the idea of Civil Disobedience the better, it will soon become almost mainstream to consider it.

                                        • #87295
                                          Andrew
                                          Participant

                                            I have long considered that it is passed time for nationwide strikes. I don’t know which industry to target first or if something like clogging the Beltway and other major routes into and out of DC would be a start. How would you coordinate shutting down DC! New York, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Denver. Maybe social media the way they do flashmobs.

                                            The problem is too many people still have their normalcy-bias, are too apathetic, or just flat couldn’t afford to lose a day or threes wages to participate.

                                            So far nothing has actually gotten the attention of TPTB. What worries me is that things will deteriorate to the point where civil disobedience will be bypassed and things will just jump into violence and anarchy.

                                            JMO :unsure:

                                          • #87296
                                            Thomas
                                            Participant

                                              “So far nothing has actually gotten the attention of TPTB.”

                                              And nothing will get their attention. Big Money does not care about your petty grievance. The game is well beyond civil disobedience.

                                              We all commit acts of civil disobedience every day. Seven mph over the speed limit is civil disobedience. Where I live 85 in a 65 mph zone is the norm. Civil disobedience is not the answer.

                                              Phase one moving toward phase two insurgency is where you would need to be in order to get noticed. Look at what the black panthers did in Chicago in the late 1960s and early 1970s where they established civil services such as ambulance service in certain neighborhoods and apply that city or county wide. Free ambulance service to a county where you have qualified EMTs and provide legitimate service for any number of activities that a govt or private business must charge for that service will quickly garner attention.

                                              Hit the money stream and you will get attention.

                                              Insurgency is an art and a science. It requires funding from sources other than the community receiving services. If you can get into that mindset and get the kind of resourcing needed to sustain the action, you will force reaction from TPTB. To be successful, you must remain five to six steps ahead of the local govt. This is truly dedicated action.

                                            • #87297
                                              Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                              Moderator

                                                The thing is we need something to build some version of camaraderie within the community.

                                                Various forms of minor civil disobedience that play to the various pet peeves we all have. By having a shared experience; even though in different political areas, could help bring about a shared purpose that doesn’t exist right now. This isn’t necessarily an “End Game Solution,” but a step in the right direction.

                                                Since at this time most of us are having difficulty forming even small groups. The idea of providing alternative offerings to traditional Government services would seem a step too far at this time.

                                                What worries me is that things will deteriorate to the point where civil disobedience will be bypassed and things will just jump into violence and anarchy.

                                                It isn’t too difficult to imagine a “Bundy Ranch” event leading to a Black Swan situation. So your concern is a valid one in my opinion and I suspect regardless of preparation things will happen with little real warning despite our best efforts.

                                                Without something to provide direction and focus we risk the real possibility of replacing one tyranny for another that’s worse.

                                              • #87298
                                                Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                Moderator

                                                  Giving the current circumstances politically, this is worth another look IMHO.

                                                • #87299
                                                  eggleston
                                                  Participant

                                                    This election has revealed to all , the complete corruption of our “National” leaders . Most of us already knew of this corruption . How will America react ? I suspect with a sigh at best. How much B.S. will America accept, is there a “LINE” that can not be crossed ? Appears that politicians can buy our American Honor with a middle class lifestyle. Civil disobedience may be a good start. How about a “separatist” movement ? Not a secessionist movement . Which would require a state legislature support. Would not ask permission ,just do it. Ukraine style minus Putin although outside support would be accepted . Any stomach in America for such a effort ?

                                                  • #87300
                                                    Weber
                                                    Participant

                                                      This election has revealed to all , the complete corruption of our “National” leaders . Most of us already knew of this corruption . How will America react ? I suspect with a sigh at best. How much B.S. will America accept, is there a “LINE” that can not be crossed ? Appears that politicians can buy our American Honor with a middle class lifestyle. Civil disobedience may be a good start. How about a “separatist” movement ? Not a secessionist movement . Which would require a state legislature support. Would not ask permission ,just do it. Ukraine style minus Putin although outside support would be accepted . Any stomach in America for such a effort ?

                                                      Nah. No way. That would require work and sacrifice. I can’t imagine too many situations that would get a majority of the lazy fat-assed Americans off their asses and stand up against the Leviathan. Unfortunately, “We the People” do not know or realize how much power they actually wield. The system is corrupt to the core but it could be changed if enough people would be willing to take action. I think people just don’t even want to bother as long as they have their cable TV, X-Box, and Mainstream Media hard wired into their brains, thinking for them. The government is like the Matrix. Everyone is plugged in except a few people brave enough to unplug.

                                                    • #87301
                                                      Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                      Moderator

                                                        How about a “separatist” movement ?

                                                        I don’t discourage anyone or group that wants to give it a try.

                                                        …get a majority…

                                                        We don’t need a majority, as much as 60% of the population is not a factor. They will go with the flow with varying degrees of complaint and support for and against Socialism and Freedom.

                                                        I see no scenario where we solve this without a fight. I hope I am wrong.

                                                        The system is broken beyond repair and it’s only a matter of when, not if, it will collapse.

                                                        Financially alone it can no longer be fixed. If we made the necessary budget cuts it would result in violence, do nothing and it will collapse resulting in violence.

                                                        I advocate considering Civil Disobedience as a logical precursor in an attempt to keep the moral high ground, but doubt Government will be willing to back down.

                                                        So at some point whether planned or by accident a confrontation will take place.

                                                        Hypothetical worse case, a relatively intact Socialist Regime comes violently against those that support Rightful Liberty.

                                                        Best case a “Black Swan” event weakens government leading to unrest, giving a somewhat smaller “Goliath” to slay.

                                                        Additionally I believe such collapse will lead to significantly higher losses in the Socialist Left population without a Federal safety net to support them.

                                                        This will alter the political landscape among the survivors, who will have far less Socialist leanings then are currently present.

                                                        The following isn’t directed at any particular commenter.

                                                        Complaining about the irrelevant people; my above 60% group, doesn’t help our situation.

                                                        I could care less what their current distraction is, they will realize their mistakes soon enough. ;-)

                                                      • #87302
                                                        Thomas
                                                        Participant

                                                          I don’t know that there will be any moral high ground. The globalist oligarchs and their leftist minions think they have the situation in hand and that we will do as told because we tend to follow the rules.

                                                          Turning the situation around on these people will produce a real shock for them. The foot soldiers for left are the inner city EBT card using mob that has been raised on violence and hatred. That won’t be an easy group to control once they slip the leash and the mouthy occupy crowd will likely find that they are easy targets for this bunch. We must real vigilant and be ready to defend hearth and kin.

                                                          We have been in the slow grind for 40 years. The pace seems to be picking up. How long will it take for the wheels to come off with a broken down old hag at the wheel?

                                                        • #87303
                                                          Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                          Moderator

                                                            I don’t know that there will be any moral high ground.

                                                            It’s a relative thing related particularly to being able to say I exhausted all avenues.

                                                            …that we will do as told because we tend to follow the rules.

                                                            I think those days are truly coming to an end.

                                                            A Socialist win in November will provide a perfect opportunity for Civil Disobedience in many areas of concern.

                                                            The recent Wikileaks and FBI document release provide me with more than adequate proof to morally justify…

                                                            “Civil disobedience is a symbolic or ritualistic violation of the law rather than a rejection of the system as a whole. The civil disobedient, finding legitimate avenues of change blocked or nonexistent, feels obligated by a higher, extralegal principle to break some specific law.”

                                                            …many nonviolent actions.

                                                          • #87304
                                                            Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                            Moderator

                                                              Armed Civil Disobedience in movies! ;-)

                                                            • #87305
                                                              TC
                                                              Participant

                                                                Those leftist minions have played a superior game. They’ve had over a century’s worth of propaganda, sophistry, infiltrating academia, public schooling, media/journalism, cultural engineering, false flags, problem reaction solution, and other tricks. It’s institutionalized sociopathy that exploits every backdoor in the human mind. They’re like some runaway artificial intelligence trying to take over the planet.

                                                                Well, I believe that as long as internet, print, television, radio, and phones still exist, then pro-liberty information warfare is important. Not just making info available, but pushing viral media and exposés that influence public opinion. That’s straight out of the liberal playbook except pushing truth instead of lies. You saw what just a couple shooting vids did for the BLM movement. Acts of civil disobedience should be force-multiplied through proper viral framing/presentation.

                                                              • #87306
                                                                Corvette
                                                                Participant

                                                                  I don’t know that there will be any moral high ground. The globalist oligarchs and their leftist minions think they have the situation in hand and that we will do as told because we tend to follow the rules.

                                                                  I don’t think “WE” minions are a factor at this point. The real fight now is not between the minions and their masters. We are rapidly building to a horrific war of the Oligarchs.

                                                                  More specifically a war between the “Old World” Oligarchy’s and the “New World” (Read as post WW II) Oligarchy’s. When giants fight, the smart move is to get the hell out of their way. This coming fight will be for all the power, one winner…….but maybe the destruction will be so horrific, there will be, no winners, just a few isolated pockets of dissociated Edens.

                                                                • #87307
                                                                  M1-Guy
                                                                  Participant

                                                                    I regret to say that I believe the civil disobedience ship has sailed. After seeing/reading the WikiLeaks, FBI docs, O’Keefe videos, etc. it is clear the absolute corruption, dishonesty and collusion is so pervasive and encompassing both major political parties, that I do not comprehend how you would go about fixing it (and we are seeing just the federal level stuff).

                                                                    It took the progressives 100 plus years to get us here. In order to turn this around, if we could start today, we will need something on the order of 100 years to fix this. We would need to start at the local level to begin to change the education system and what is taught and work from there, and it would need to get up and going relatively unnoticed. Seems tough to do in the world we are in today with instant everything.

                                                                    It seems more likely that we will begin to migrate to various sections of the country that align with our ethical, religious, governing and political views. In fact this guy from Russia predicted something like this would happen (eventually) in 2008. I remember at the time he was laughed at as a fool. I think I hear him chuckling right now. Read the comments.

                                                                    US Will Separate Into Six Parts: Professor Igor Panarin

                                                                  • #87308
                                                                    Anonymous
                                                                    Inactive

                                                                      The right-wing activists are feeling marginalized, even the left-wing activists are feeling marginalized, I have a few friends who are leaning towards Jill Stein because they’re so pissed off at the corruption in the Democratic Party. If things do get worse from here I do hope the right-wing activists don’t get so caught up arguing with the left-wing activists that both are distracted from dealing with the oligarchs that really have rigged the system. I imagine at least some of those folks who were feeling the Bern in opposition to the current Democratic power structure could open up to our side once they realize the inconsistency between being angry at government corruption and demanding more government involvement in our everyday affairs, especially as the situation within the government grows worse. It happened to me, it can happen to others.

                                                                    • #87309
                                                                      Andrew
                                                                      Participant

                                                                        It seems more likely that we will begin to migrate to various sections of the country that align with our ethical, religious, governing and political views. In fact this guy from Russia predicted something like this would happen (eventually) in 2008. I remember at the time he was laughed at as a fool. I think I hear him chuckling right now. Read the comments.

                                                                        http://www.opinionbug.com/3439/us-will-separate-into-six-parts-professor-igor-panarin/

                                                                        Unfortunately that may precipitate the fight or it will happen after the fight. Hope I’m wrong, but, sheee dun look too good from here.

                                                                      • #87310
                                                                        eggleston
                                                                        Participant

                                                                          Our Federal government is simply to big. The Feds seem to bribe weak minded State / local pols with “FEDERAL FUNDING”. Really doesn’t seem to be any good answers . Go local maybe , being able to hold our local pols a bit more accountable . Maybe the big bad Feds are not really as powerful as they appear ? Maybe just a scary loud voice behind a curtain . Our future as Americans may come down to a force of wills and the will to use force . A big event may give Americans the chance to seize the moment and create local/regional change . I don’t believe the statist will give up power easily or peacefully . In the end every law will be enforced with violence if needed ( except rioters in Baltimore apparently ).

                                                                        • #87311
                                                                          HiDesertRat
                                                                          Participant

                                                                            Courtesy of Ms. Ayn Rand,

                                                                            “Did you really think we want those laws observed?” said Dr. Ferris. “We want them to be broken. You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of boy scouts you’re up against… We’re after power and we mean it… There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system, Mr. Reardon, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.”

                                                                            “Atlas Shrugged”. Published 1957. Almost six decades ago. Orwell published his tome a bit earlier. Roadmaps for our future. The Highway to Hell. Yesterday/Tommorrow has arrived. Any questions?

                                                                          • #87312
                                                                            Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                                            Moderator

                                                                              Since many are again “feeling need to do something!” or at least bitching about it.

                                                                              I thought bringing this back up appropriate.

                                                                              If your peaceful redress has not worked the next step is Civil Disobedience! :good:

                                                                              Some excerpts from:
                                                                              Civil disobedience
                                                                              Written by: The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica
                                                                              http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/119219/civil-disobedience

                                                                              “Civil disobedience is a symbolic or ritualistic violation of the law rather than a rejection of the system as a whole. The civil disobedient, finding legitimate avenues of change blocked or nonexistent, feels obligated by a higher, extralegal principle to break some specific law.”

                                                                              “The principle of civil disobedience has achieved some standing in international law through the war crime trials at Nürnberg after World War II, which affirmed the principle that an individual may, under certain circumstances, be held accountable for failure to break the laws of his country.”

                                                                              …and if your really serious!

                                                                              There is a rebirth of an old idea developing regarding Civil Disobedience, in many ways it seems uniquely American.

                                                                              What is it?

                                                                              Armed Civil Disobedience!

                                                                              Many might think this is a new twist, but if we remember Lexington Green April 19, 1775 this was a perfect example of Armed Civil Disobedience.

                                                                              If the British had turned and gone back to Boston when confronted by Captain John Parker; not very likely, but the “Shot Heard Round the World” would have been saved for another day.

                                                                              What to date has been a stark contrast to the events at Lexington and let’s say the “Bundy Ranch” event, is the fact that Captain John Parker’s Militia was greatly outnumbered while the BLM and other LEO’s were the ones outnumbered in Nevada.

                                                                              It would not have taken much for a fight to take place on that day of April 12, 2014 (what’s the deal with April?).

                                                                              Obviously the stakes are quite high during any Armed Civil Disobedience event.

                                                                              Armed Civil Disobedience is about calling the Governments bluff!

                                                                              Force them to cave in or barring that pick a fight!

                                                                              Obviously as learned from the Bundy Ranch Event, Government has a long memory and may choose to come after you once the emotions have calmed down, this may even be years later.

                                                                              Have no mistake in your thinking the stakes are very high if you proceed with this option!

                                                                              I’ve listened to much “TALK” (also known as bullshit) over the last 40 plus years! With many thinking they’re the first to consider something in this fight, rarely true.

                                                                              So either…

                                                                              Dazzle us with answers, help us prepare, or do something constructive.

                                                                              …or “stop with complaints and excuses” (also known as bullshitting)! B-)

                                                                            • #87313
                                                                              libertycalls
                                                                              Participant

                                                                                The problem with our current situation is a gradual approach to applying governments coercive power. In 1774, every Whig in America was ready to grab their rifle and cartridge box, because they had seen first hand the abuse of their government. The oppressive force was at max 4,000 soldiers, that would include every soldier in the British Army. General Gage had experimented with guerrilla warfare, but his superiors overrode his decision. They wanted quick and decisive battle. They wanted everything to be rule of law, to keep their government accepted by the Torys and border line Whigs.

                                                                                The Whigs had a problem with being used solely as profit makers for the crown. They expressed their concerns and were greeted with decisive answers. That was enough to cause a rebellions spirit that only grew as the government cracked down. The crack downs were rule of law, and the colonists were able to throw what ever force was used back in the face of the regulars.

                                                                                The government doesn’t want a quick end to the problem of people who want to be left alone. They will slowly invade our privacy, get their teachers into the education system, promote people who want total government, and spread their power in any way possible.

                                                                                Today we have groups that I believe are associated with the government starting riots. They’re not afraid to punch anyone who disagrees with them. The police chiefs tell their officers to stand down, while the so called “law abiding” are forced to flee.

                                                                                We are the side that’s rule of law, and for that reason we will be defeated.

                                                                              • #87314
                                                                                Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                                                Moderator

                                                                                  In 1774…

                                                                                  Your analogy is missing many key facts regarding the build-up to your 1774 date. The Stamp Act being probably the best begining.

                                                                                  Let’s remember the Stamp Act in itself was really an act of Civil Disobedience. It took just shy of ten years before the so called “Shot Heard Round the World. ”

                                                                                  They will slowly invade our privacy, get their teachers into the education system, promote people who want total government, and spread their power in any way possible.

                                                                                  All of this is past tense, but it isn’t enough due to both political pushback and the threat of armed resistance. The numbers game requires compliance and is in fact just a facade.

                                                                                  They’re not afraid to punch anyone who disagrees with them. The police chiefs tell their officers to stand down, while the so called “law abiding” are forced to flee.

                                                                                  This only happened initially, as more people began to physically resist and the alternative media began to show what these compliant local governments were up to they chose to abandon these staged violent riots as ineffective and counterproductive to their Socialist goals. Americans proved not docile enough at present, but they will try again a later time.

                                                                                  …for that reason we will be defeated.

                                                                                  I totally reject this defeatist nonsense and suspect much of this part of dedicated Socialist PSYOPS.

                                                                                  I suspect you have spent too much time in one of more of the following: Watching mainstream news (propaganda), psuedo liberty blog sites (WRSA, etc…), and/or living in occupied territory.

                                                                                  Stick around and you can overcome this with a rational exchange of ideas.

                                                                                  Consider Interesting Threats and Numbers (Updated 29OCT16) for a starting point at how relatively weak the Governments numbers really are.

                                                                                  Almost time for me to complete the every two year update on that Thread. ;-)

                                                                                • #87315
                                                                                  libertycalls
                                                                                  Participant

                                                                                    I picked 1774 because of the powder alarm. Concord wasn’t the first time the regulars went after an arms store, nor the second.

                                                                                    On September 1st the British regular army went after the Provincial Powder House in Massachusetts. By the time they got there all of the privately owned powder had been removed, but they confiscated “the king’s powder” which really belonged to the people. One interesting thing to think about is the Sheriff, who unlocked the store for the regulars, he was run out of town. Which has happened more recently with the Battle of Athens.

                                                                                    Then there was the Portsmouth alarm at Fort William and Mary. Where colonists taunted the regulars from the other side of a drawbridge, after overrunning four invalids holding the fort. No shots were fired but use of force was in play. They eventually lowered the bridge but the cannons stored at Portsmouth were already hidden.

                                                                                    Confiscation was significant because it was the point where British colonists decided they would fight the regulars if they tried it again. The other acts of rebellion were protests. It’s also significant because it wasn’t just confiscation, it was limits on import. We currently have limits on import of weapons. Anyone with an AK or H&K will know about that.

                                                                                    I’ll get back to your other points later on, I have a toddler who needs some books read to him before bed then, then I’m gonna hit the gym.

                                                                                  • #87316
                                                                                    Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                                                    Moderator

                                                                                      I picked…

                                                                                      My point wasn’t your date chosen, but the lack of context.

                                                                                      Your above post does a better job in that regards.

                                                                                      Still the problems with British rule had been building for decades as has our current situation, though the case could be made for over a hundred years.

                                                                                      Of course our American Revolution is not really a good comparison. In reality there is no real historical precedent for our current predicament. That in itself is as close as the two meet in that they are both unprecedented. So if we are successful in any restoration of Liberty it would be equally unprecedented as our Nations birth.

                                                                                      We have some modest gains politically at the Local and State level, we are beyond the point of meaningful change at the Federal level through traditional political methods.

                                                                                      The next logical step is Civil Disobedience in it’s many forms.

                                                                                      I have little hope; baring a black swan event, in it’s success, but it is necessary to exhaust all options.

                                                                                      …I have a toddler who needs some books read to him before bed…

                                                                                      Take your time with that important duty, it’s unlikely we can solve these issues tonight. ;-)

                                                                                    • #87317
                                                                                      wheelsee
                                                                                      Participant

                                                                                        Freedom begins in one’s mind.

                                                                                        What are the little things in life that sway towards freedom or slavery?? Some will seem kinda silly but what we teach our youngsters will determine the finale. Things like helping those less fortunate without stealing their dignity. Do you help someone to make your self feel better or because you could be in the other person’s shoes?? Things like standing up for someone when being teased or bullied. Like engaging in conversation with someone everyone avoids.

                                                                                        What questions are you asking yourself or your offspring?? Do I mindlessly follow others or am I a fringe person, listening to my own drum?? Do I prefer being surrounded by people in shallow relationships or do I count 1 or 2 as best friends and the rest counted as acquaintances? When someone says something PC or stupid, oh what I’m saying?? Do I even engage with stupid people (all the time, its what keeps me employed)?

                                                                                        A 3-year-old has the best concept – “but why??” Always ask yourself and others one simple question – “why?” to any situation. If you can’t reason yourself into a solution, you haven’t thought it through well enough.

                                                                                        Yes, we pay the leviathan but I do such with the use off a CPA, to legally defer or reduce my portion as mush possible.

                                                                                        Freedom begins and, ultimately, end’s in one’s mind. You are as free as you care to be. But be warned – most don’t want freedom, for they want the security of the herd, the government, the plantation.

                                                                                      • #87318
                                                                                        tango
                                                                                        Participant

                                                                                          We are the side that’s rule of law, and for that reason we will be defeated.

                                                                                          100% if you maintain that attitude. Correct your trajectory man.

                                                                                        • #87319
                                                                                          libertycalls
                                                                                          Participant

                                                                                            All of this is past tense, but it isn’t enough due to both political pushback and the threat of armed resistance. The numbers game requires compliance and is in fact just a facade.

                                                                                            Compliance has a hidden danger. If we fall back on the past twenty years of conservative behavior, we will be brought right back to where we are today. The idea’s of the past three presidents all contribute to a stronger Federal Government, to where people worship their leader and the country. I have a very limited religious view, but that means I only worship god. This causes me some concern with things like the pledge of allegiance. Do I really need to pledge my allegiance to the government? Their job was originally to protect our liberty, but almost as soon as the Constitution was written their job turned to correcting problems with society. The progressives point out all of the overbearing policy of conservatives and offer their own solutions. The conservatives do the same. Then end result is always more government. So disobedience towards progressives to push a conservative agenda could lead to more government. Disobedience has to be towards a government that tries to correct society by limiting liberty.

                                                                                            Public education was created to keep compliance with nationalism. It may have been hijacked to promote a progressive and almost Marxist agenda, but the original goal of compliance is the root issue. Replacing the teachers won’t work, the solution would be to end the current school system. Civil disobedience would be taking my kids out of school and not paying taxes. My options will likely lead to jail and having my kids taken away.

                                                                                            Here’s a four part youtube series on the Prussian Reform Movement that lead to the U.S. school system:

                                                                                            I’m reading “The Underground History of American Education” by John Taylor Gatto. He has a lot of research on how tyrannical the education system is and gives examples of how kids actually learn. There’s an unrelated analogy on gun control where he compares gasoline in cars to sticks of TNT. His point is, there’s no background check on gasoline.

                                                                                          • #87320
                                                                                            libertycalls
                                                                                            Participant

                                                                                              suspect you have spent too much time in one of more of the following: Watching mainstream news (propaganda), psuedo liberty blog sites (WRSA, etc…), and/or living in occupied territory.

                                                                                              It was more of a strategy planning statement. The socialists gaining authoritarian control over us is the worst case. This means we are probably taxed at 100%, we can’t own guns, healthcare has a six month waiting list to be seen, what else can we think of? The goal isn’t cause fear, it’s to identify the things we fear. Once we know what we fear we can make a decision without emotion. It don’t know a lot about stoicism, but I believe that’s where this way of thinking comes from. Fear tactics are used to create an emotional response and emotions can cloud judgement. So I’m attempting to disarming the fear mongers.

                                                                                            • #87321
                                                                                              libertycalls
                                                                                              Participant

                                                                                                A 3-year-old has the best concept – “but why??” Always ask yourself and others one simple question – “why?” to any situation. If you can’t reason yourself into a solution, you haven’t thought it through well enough.

                                                                                                My three year old gave me a real question the other day that I couldn’t answer with anything besides, “I don’t know”. We were at the gun store picking out his first rifle. One thing we’ve been working on is going to the store so he can see how a transaction works. I want something so I trade my money for the thing I want. He got confused because after I paid for his rifle we had to leave it in the store. California makes us wait ten days, even for a single shot .22lr, even if I have a safe full of guns already. The state can see that I have a multiple handguns and long guns, because of registration. So my son asked “why do we have to leave the gun in the store?”. My answer was, “I don’t know”. I thought on it a little bit and now I see what it is. The state never lets me grow up to make my own decisions. They will always be the adult who knows best, while the people are children who must be corrected.

                                                                                              • #87322
                                                                                                wheelsee
                                                                                                Participant

                                                                                                  @libertycalls

                                                                                                  I’ve been known to say “because other people think they know what is best for you and I. Does what happened seem fair/just to you?”

                                                                                                • #87323
                                                                                                  Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                                                                  Moderator

                                                                                                    Then end result is always more government. So disobedience towards progressives to push a conservative agenda could lead to more government.

                                                                                                    No doubt, consider this quote I made back in April 16, 2014.

                                                                                                    When corrupt politicians regardless of their political bent reward this behavior through multiple generations of Administrations, both Left and Right. The survival of the bureaucracy therefore makes this behavior the norm.

                                                                                                    This is the ultimate demonstration of the danger of “the Ends, Justify the Means!” By subverting our morals for some perceived “Greater Good” we end up substituting one Tyranny for another.

                                                                                                    Though I believe this has more to do with political corruption than a particular ideology.

                                                                                                    I am well aware of the Prussian educational purpose, been fighting ignorance of this since at least 1980’s. Good point for further discussion in it’s own Thread.

                                                                                                    I’m reading “The Underground History of American Education” by John Taylor Gatto.

                                                                                                    His “Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling” I read in 1992 when it came out. Good stuff.

                                                                                                    So I’m attempting to disarming the fear mongers.

                                                                                                    Welcome to the club! ;-)

                                                                                                    March 25, 2015
                                                                                                    It amazes me that so many Participants (of those web sites) still have any credibility after their fearmongering and obvious ignorance as self proclaimed subject matter experts.

                                                                                                    By their accounts (Nov-Dec 2014) most of us should be dead and the rest under quarantine.

                                                                                                    I spend quite a bit of my time in the MVT Forum coming against fearmongering, which interestingly enough I consider your statemment…

                                                                                                    We are the side that’s rule of law, and for that reason we will be defeated.

                                                                                                    …to be just that, fearmongering. ;-)

                                                                                                    Fortunately this doesn’t have to be a permanent condition! :yes:

                                                                                                  • #87324
                                                                                                    libertycalls
                                                                                                    Participant

                                                                                                      Welcome to the club!

                                                                                                      Joe (G.W.N.S.) wrote:
                                                                                                      March 25, 2015
                                                                                                      It amazes me that so many Participants (of those web sites) still have any credibility after their fearmongering and obvious ignorance as self proclaimed subject matter experts.

                                                                                                      By their accounts (Nov-Dec 2014) most of us should be dead and the rest under quarantine.

                                                                                                      I spend quite a bit of my time in the MVT Forum coming against fearmongering, which interestingly enough I consider your statemment…

                                                                                                      They may have some good information but they’re drawing the wrong conclusions. Mine is that if we identify the worst case scenario and work backwards, we will be making decisions based on reasoning instead of emotion. I probably went too far with saying we will be defeated. Law and order in 1774 was the losing side, today we may be on the side of law and order that wins by adapting.

                                                                                                      Gage knew how to fight like a guerrilla just the same as the colonists. He had even organized a group of light infantry that wore brown coats as camouflage and would train in forest fighting. He was preparing to use these tactics during the French and Indian War, then leadership ordered him to take fort Ticonderoga using traditional methods. From then on he was forced to follow the 1648 rules of war and engage in first generation warfare. If he had been allowed to adapt perhaps we would all still be speaking British?

                                                                                                    • #87325
                                                                                                      Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                                                                      Moderator

                                                                                                        Well enough Thread drift! ;-)

                                                                                                        A quick reminder of the origin and point of this Thread.

                                                                                                        civil disobedience
                                                                                                        noun
                                                                                                        : refusal to obey laws as a way of forcing the government to do or change something
                                                                                                        http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civil disobedience

                                                                                                        Some excerpts from:
                                                                                                        Civil disobedience
                                                                                                        Written by: The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica
                                                                                                        http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/119219/civil-disobedience

                                                                                                        “Civil disobedience is a symbolic or ritualistic violation of the law rather than a rejection of the system as a whole. The civil disobedient, finding legitimate avenues of change blocked or nonexistent, feels obligated by a higher, extralegal principle to break some specific law.”

                                                                                                        “The principle of civil disobedience has achieved some standing in international law through the war crime trials at Nürnberg after World War II, which affirmed the principle that an individual may, under certain circumstances, be held accountable for failure to break the laws of his country.”

                                                                                                        I’ve attached a PDF copy of Civil Disobedience By Henry David Thoreau which I highly recommend.
                                                                                                        http://www.ibiblio.org/ebooks/Thoreau/Civil Disobedience.pdf

                                                                                                        I am not going to recommend any course of action regarding specific acts of Civil Disobedience, this is up to the individual to decide based on his or her conscience.

                                                                                                        We have all seen the acts carried out by many recently in the name of the 2nd Amendment, from armed protest, blatant violation of laws at these protests, and failure to comply with various Laws such as in New York and Connecticut.

                                                                                                        I believe this to be something for consideration by each of us.

                                                                                                        Know what you may be getting yourself into before you act in order to avoid any ignorance of the price to be paid.

                                                                                                        :good:

                                                                                                      • #87326
                                                                                                        Anonymous
                                                                                                        Inactive

                                                                                                          We should not automatically concern ourselves as being for the “rule of law” or “law and order”. Laws can go sideways pretty quick, will we be for rule of law if there’s a nationwide ban and roundup of semi-auto rifles? The “progressives” are crying for gun bans in the name of maintaining order, disarmed societies are indeed more passive and orderly ones for their states to manage, for the public good, of course.

                                                                                                          We should concern ourselves on being on the side of the rule of liberty. If something doesn’t promote individual liberty, we should strongly question the value of it. I won’t accuse anyone of being a statist here because I don’t think anyone here for the right reasons is one, but we should avoid ways of thinking that glorify some past condition of the state. Every generation since at least the Civil War and probably even further back to our founding has seem some expansion of the state, we are simply at the current peak statism.

                                                                                                          “Law and order” has been as much of a justification for the expanding powers of the state as has any liberal cry for safe schools. The only “rule of law” is that there should be less of them. Each administration, liberal or conservative, has sought to expand the state to achieve their own ends, and then cries bloody murder when this expanded state goes into the hands of the other side, this has been the trend for a long time. The only question is when, in an increasingly polarized society, it becomes too much for the other side to bear and things finally go off the rails.

                                                                                                          Sorry for getting too philosophical, hope this doesn’t count as me “pontificating” again.

                                                                                                          Non-compliance means we willfully comply with laws that respect liberty, not because they are laws but because they honor liberty, and simply ignore the ones that don’t. People have been seizing their own liberty to smoke a bowl for the past century despite the state banning it, it’s not impossible, though for one’s own well-being I’d argue there are ways to be prudent about it.

                                                                                                        • #87327
                                                                                                          D Close
                                                                                                          Moderator

                                                                                                            There comes a time during the dissolution of empire that lawlessness becomes normal. The ruling class clearly acts like we are there. This is a bad sign in my opinion. Tribe has always been the foundation of nations and thus no wonder ours seems to be cracking.
                                                                                                            Civility and obedience to cultural norms may only be relevant within the context of a tribal structure of shared value and experience. Honor is found at that level.
                                                                                                            I’d say that for the level of civil disobedience I find most meaningful I need a proximate tribe to support that. Honestly, I’d feel a lot better about this if the people on this forum lived within a few miles. I’d be fine having Joe as the sherriff. He’d be bored to death. We’d all take a turn as mayor or dogcatcher because, well, it was Gramma’s turn last week and because duty. Liberty thrives where government is less.
                                                                                                            Until you have proximate tribe, you don’t have much. I do see stirrings and some hope in this regard. The greatest threat to the staus quo is a gang of men who are loyal to each other, who have a sense of honor and adhere to a code (i.e. MVT Code of Conduct?) The Empire of Nothing deserves nothing from you but disobedience and disgust. Do it wisely and take care of those close to you. Kith and kin.
                                                                                                            I’ve met and trained with some fine folks here and I trust them more than most anyone. Building tribe takes time but it is an action with high value.

                                                                                                          • #87328
                                                                                                            libertycalls
                                                                                                            Participant

                                                                                                              I’ve attached a PDF copy of Civil Disobedience By Henry David Thoreau which I highly recommend.

                                                                                                              I started reading this and I’m about halfway through. I’m looking for some examples of when this actually worked. There’s another PDF I was reading before this called:

                                                                                                              SEDITION SUBVERSION AND SABOTAGE FIELD MANUAL No. 1A
                                                                                                              Three Part Solution to The State”

                                                                                                              There’s a section that disputes the Civil Disobedience strategy. As I understand, the author believes Civil Disobedience is to protest a specific law not necessarily an out of control government. The point is to gain publicity. To gain this publicity you face the consequences, which could ultimately be death. For that reason I would say no to Civil Disobedience. The cost outweighs the benefit.

                                                                                                              https://www.badquaker.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/FieldManualNo1.pdf

                                                                                                            • #87329
                                                                                                              Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                                                                              Moderator

                                                                                                                Have you read this Thread from the begining?

                                                                                                                It doesn’t seem to be the case?

                                                                                                                The point is to gain publicity.

                                                                                                                While a side benefit could be publicity, the point is to get Government to back down from enforcing a particular law(s). To in effect nullify Governments power in a particular area and/or let Government know they have gone too far.

                                                                                                                As to the consequences, I have repeatedly pointed out that one must be ready to pay the price. This price ranges from, but is not limited to arrest, imprisonment, bodily injury, and death. I consider these to be self evident.

                                                                                                                …the consequences, which could ultimately be death. For that reason I would say no to Civil Disobedience. The cost outweighs the benefit.

                                                                                                                We all have to act in accordance to our conscience and beliefs.

                                                                                                                The price of Freedom has always been high and by not challenging infringements on our Rights immediately as they happen has increased the price!

                                                                                                                Civil Disobedience is the last option before revolution/civil war.

                                                                                                                While a high price at the individual level, the price of Civil Disobedience pales in comparison to the cost of War!

                                                                                                                If it comes to War few here will survive it, this will include our families. Regardless whether you participate in it or not, as there will be no safe haven.

                                                                                                              • #87330
                                                                                                                wheelsee
                                                                                                                Participant

                                                                                                                  Perhaps a review of history?? To see what our Founding Fathers thought about cost…….(I realize maybe a thread drift but it sometimes behooves us to review history…….)

                                                                                                                  We Mutually Pledge To Each Other Our Lives, Our Fortunes And Our Sacred Honor

                                                                                                                  http://www.americanheritage.com/content/we-mutually-pledge-each-other-our-lives-our-fortunes-and-our-sacred-honor

                                                                                                                • #87331
                                                                                                                  tango
                                                                                                                  Participant

                                                                                                                    I’m looking for some examples of when this actually worked.

                                                                                                                    Define: “worked”. If you think “worked” means the government just backed down and gave the people what they wanted then you won’t find it. What you will find is steadfast people standing their ground in eventual war for their values. If you don’t have any values worth fighting for then there is likely a lot of soul searching left to do.

                                                                                                                    For that reason I would say no to Civil Disobedience. The cost outweighs the benefit.

                                                                                                                    Kind of ironic given your username.

                                                                                                                    To all:
                                                                                                                    This is not as complicated as it’s being made out to be. What is lacking here is detachment. Look within yourself, not within a history book. There lies the answer.

                                                                                                                    Civil Disobedience purpose is not to champion change of the whole system. We’re not trying to boil the ocean. The instinct to think that would be impossible is correct because the understanding of the objective is incorrect. Sometimes when your brain goes “error-error-error” it’s best to diagnose the situation – look around and figure out why before choosing an action.

                                                                                                                    Freedom is a choice.

                                                                                                                  • #87332
                                                                                                                    Civilianresponder
                                                                                                                    Participant

                                                                                                                      :good:

                                                                                                                    • #87333
                                                                                                                      libertycalls
                                                                                                                      Participant

                                                                                                                        we willfully comply with laws that respect liberty

                                                                                                                        Civil disobedience relies on the idea of “rightful liberty”, where some laws can exist if we have a limit on government. I’ve always been a strong supported of the 2nd Amendment up until recently. That was the entire reason I started reading history and paying attention to politics. I’ve reached a point where I can no longer believe in this idea of limited government. To clarify, I want even less, not more. I’ve come to the conclusion that civil disobedience won’t accomplish my goal.

                                                                                                                        Why don’t I believe in the 2nd Amendment anymore? The short version is, it didn’t work. The longer version: the constitution which pre-dates the Bill of Rights by a few months negated a group of people’s rights to keep arms for self defense. As our country progressed, this group of people weren’t freed, but the rest of us were placed under the same laws. This is probably another thread, so I’ll stop it there.

                                                                                                                        My entire interest in liberty focused on how we need to defend the second amendment, and I’m at the point where I’m realizing it can’t be defended. To achieve liberty we must get further away from this idea of limited government, a government that was able to grow into tyranny. I don’t believe civil disobedience to achieve rightful liberty can make us free again.

                                                                                                                      • #87334
                                                                                                                        libertycalls
                                                                                                                        Participant

                                                                                                                          Perhaps a review of history?? To see what our Founding Fathers thought about cost…….(I realize maybe a thread drift but it sometimes behooves us to review history…….)

                                                                                                                          We Mutually Pledge To Each Other Our Lives, Our Fortunes And Our Sacred Honor

                                                                                                                          http://www.americanheritage.com/content/we-mutually-pledge-each-other-our-lives-our-fortunes-and-our-sacred-honor

                                                                                                                          It’s not that I wouldn’t be willing to fight, or sacrifice my freedom, my entire existence in life is to defend my children until they can take over the job. My job is not only to protect them from physical violence, but also to protect them from serfdom. On the latter, if I don’t do my job now, it will be harder for them when they take over.

                                                                                                                        • #87335
                                                                                                                          Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                                                                                          Moderator

                                                                                                                            To clarify, I want even less, not more.

                                                                                                                            My job is not only to protect them from physical violence, but also to protect them from serfdom. On the latter, if I don’t do my job now, it will be harder for them when they take over.

                                                                                                                            We all have to act in accordance to our conscience and beliefs.

                                                                                                                            So other than my personal “pet peeve” regarding defeatist attutudes, I don’t expect anyone to follow my lead in these regards.

                                                                                                                            Any success in pursuit of Freedom is a good thing.

                                                                                                                          • #87336
                                                                                                                            Anonymous
                                                                                                                            Inactive

                                                                                                                              I would say that I honor the US Constitution because so far it has been the strongest legal document in regards to preserving civil liberties, however flawed it may be. At the same time, I don’t worship it and would be very much open to a new legal framework that guarantees liberty further than the Constitution. (I’m not entirely convinced that the Articles couldn’t be salvaged.) I think our country could have avoided many of our current problems if it had treated African- and Native Americans as equals rather than subjects, but this is the reality we live in. That being said, if we were to try to craft a new Constitution from scratch under the current circumstances we’d have half the country begging for even more government with “positive” rights written throughout, so I think our current Constitution, restored to it’s most basic state, is the least-bad solution.

                                                                                                                              Do remember that the Constitution gives us no rights, it only lists rights the federal government (and later, by extension, the states) is explicitly is barred from infringing upon. If your interest in liberty stems from the need to defend the Second Amendment you’re kind of approaching this backwards, your interest in the Second Amendment should be focused on the need to defend liberty.

                                                                                                                              I would say that I still believe in some form of government, some kind of night watchman state, since we live in a world with state structures that would quickly invade if we abandoned the state altogether, otherwise I’d probably be some kind of anarchist, which at this point I think is a perfectly coherent philosophically, if not in practice. In credit to the Founders, the idea of the right to bear arms was a means to reduce the need for a centralized military, but handicapped by a number of factors, including a fear of armed slave revolts.

                                                                                                                              Off the top of my head I can mention prohibition as an area where civil disobedience worked. Enough people kept drinking despite the law and the social costs of banning alcohol (deaths from bathtub brews, alcohol cartels in the form of mafias, etc.) became severe enough that eventually the government relented and re-legalized alcohol use. In many cases prior to the end juries simply began exercising their right to nullification and refused to convict. Juries in northern states also refused to convict runaway slaves after the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act in protest of the law, this was the original argument for “state’s rights” before it became identified with slavery itself. In the modern era we see states ignoring Federal drug scheduling and legalizing cannabis anyway, and the federal government has been forced into a position where they comply despite their own laws.

                                                                                                                              Beyond simply disregarding unjust laws when we can, we also need to develop systems of dual power to subvert the authority of the state in matters where it doesn’t belong through mutual aid, grey economies, and the like. Such (voluntary) structures could also fill in the power vacuum in the case of civil conflict and a collapse of official institutions. The lefties are better than we are at this IMO, not sure how we ourselves get there. Just an opinion.

                                                                                                                              I’m not quite sure what you’re alluding to after civil disobedience, but echoing what Joe said, if things do ever get so bad that they devolve into armed conflict we need to be able to honestly say we expended all feasible civil options. It’s not only a tactical one, legitimizing the armed struggle, it’s a moral one. I just came back from a civil war not too long ago, climbing house to house through the wreckage of people’s lives while they struggle in refugee camps, they really suck if you’re living through it.

                                                                                                                            • #87337
                                                                                                                              RobRoy
                                                                                                                              Participant

                                                                                                                                The political and social “Right wing” in this country is simply not of the mindset for civil disobedience.

                                                                                                                                I look at them as the smart school boy sitting on the edge of his chair trying explain or “educate” the woman principal on his mistakenly being in trouble.

                                                                                                                              • #87338
                                                                                                                                Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                                                                                                Moderator

                                                                                                                                  I think Rampantraptor’s makes a reasonable point regarding Prohibition and Marijuana laws.

                                                                                                                                  Even though I don’t support their goals, the “Sanctuary” efforts regarding Illegal Aliens is another area where Civil Disobedience is working, at this time anyway.

                                                                                                                                  The political and social “Right wing” in this country is simply not of the mindset for civil disobedience.

                                                                                                                                  I don’t think this is completely accurate.

                                                                                                                                  The Civil Disobedience in New York and Connecticut is a decent example.

                                                                                                                                  The “I will not Comply” efforts in Washington state is a even better example where they not only ignored “Background Check” laws, but publicly conducted illegal sales at rallies and so called “Patriot Gun Shows” while armed in front of State Police.

                                                                                                                                  Some of the leadership of these events have been subject to varying degrees of Government retaliation, hence my caution to not take these methods without full understanding of consequences.

                                                                                                                                  This price ranges from, but is not limited to arrest, imprisonment, bodily injury, and death.

                                                                                                                                  What is a particularly interesting point is all of the above examples are in Socialist controlled States.

                                                                                                                                  It’s important to remember that you don’t need anything even close to a majority for these to have a positive effect.

                                                                                                                                • #87339
                                                                                                                                  RobRoy
                                                                                                                                  Participant

                                                                                                                                    Ok Joe I will give you that, thanks for reminding me.

                                                                                                                                    But a lot of the non conforming to the gun laws is that democratic voters don’t think this is aimed at them, they know its political posturing by their coalition partners aimed at us not them.

                                                                                                                                  • #130677
                                                                                                                                    Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                                                                                                    Moderator

                                                                                                                                      Giving Virginia’s situation this is worth a bump!

                                                                                                                                      As a refresher…

                                                                                                                                      “Civil disobedience is a symbolic or ritualistic violation of the law rather than a rejection of the system as a whole. The civil disobedient, finding legitimate avenues of change blocked or nonexistent, feels obligated by a higher, extralegal principle to break some specific law.”

                                                                                                                                      “The principle of civil disobedience has achieved some standing in international law through the war crime trials at Nürnberg after World War II, which affirmed the principle that an individual may, under certain circumstances, be held accountable for failure to break the laws of his country.”

                                                                                                                                      For increased pressure…

                                                                                                                                      There is a rebirth of an old idea developing regarding Civil Disobedience, in many ways it seems uniquely American.

                                                                                                                                      What is it?

                                                                                                                                      Armed Civil Disobedience!

                                                                                                                                      Many might think this is a new twist, but if we remember Lexington Green April 19, 1775 this was a perfect example of Armed Civil Disobedience.

                                                                                                                                      If the British had turned and gone back to Boston when confronted by Captain John Parker; not very likely, but the “Shot Heard Round the World” would have been saved for another day.

                                                                                                                                      Consider…

                                                                                                                                      Let’s face it resorting to Armed Civil Disobedience is just one step below a true Rebellion. It is right on the razors edge and dangerous in the extreme!

                                                                                                                                      Consequences…

                                                                                                                                      As to the consequences, I have repeatedly pointed out that one must be ready to pay the price. This price ranges from, but is not limited to arrest, imprisonment, bodily injury, and death. I consider these to be self evident.

                                                                                                                                      …the consequences, which could ultimately be death. For that reason I would say no to Civil Disobedience. The cost outweighs the benefit.

                                                                                                                                      We all have to act in accordance to our conscience and beliefs.

                                                                                                                                      Example…

                                                                                                                                      Even though I don’t support their goals, the “Sanctuary” efforts regarding Illegal Aliens is another area where Civil Disobedience is working, at this time anyway.

                                                                                                                                      Don’t mistake Armed Civil Disobedience and armed protest as they are not the same.

                                                                                                                                      For example the talk of armed protest at “Lobby Day” would be counter productive, where Armed Civil Disobedience in defiance to an actual in effect law may have purpose (refusal to comply, vice solely an armed threat).

                                                                                                                                    • #130689
                                                                                                                                      Max
                                                                                                                                      Keymaster

                                                                                                                                        Civil Disobedience is not Civil Disorder.

                                                                                                                                      • #130692
                                                                                                                                        Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                                                                                                        Moderator

                                                                                                                                          Civil Disobedience is not Civil Disorder.

                                                                                                                                          Exactly! :good:

                                                                                                                                          Significant difference. :yes:

                                                                                                                                        • #130698

                                                                                                                                          As a long-time lurker belated thanks to Joe for starting this thread. I agree completely with this post, even to the suggestion of resurrecting the Articles of Confederation!

                                                                                                                                          I would say that I honor the US Constitution because so far it has been the strongest legal document in regards to preserving civil liberties, however flawed it may be. At the same time, I don’t worship it and would be very much open to a new legal framework that guarantees liberty further than the Constitution. (I’m not entirely convinced that the Articles couldn’t be salvaged.) I think our country could have avoided many of our current problems if it had treated African- and Native Americans as equals rather than subjects, but this is the reality we live in. That being said, if we were to try to craft a new Constitution from scratch under the current circumstances we’d have half the country begging for even more government with “positive” rights written throughout, so I think our current Constitution, restored to it’s most basic state, is the least-bad solution.

                                                                                                                                          Do remember that the Constitution gives us no rights, it only lists rights the federal government (and later, by extension, the states) is explicitly is barred from infringing upon. If your interest in liberty stems from the need to defend the Second Amendment you’re kind of approaching this backwards, your interest in the Second Amendment should be focused on the need to defend liberty.

                                                                                                                                          I would say that I still believe in some form of government, some kind of night watchman state, since we live in a world with state structures that would quickly invade if we abandoned the state altogether, otherwise I’d probably be some kind of anarchist, which at this point I think is a perfectly coherent philosophically, if not in practice. In credit to the Founders, the idea of the right to bear arms was a means to reduce the need for a centralized military, but handicapped by a number of factors, including a fear of armed slave revolts.

                                                                                                                                          Off the top of my head I can mention prohibition as an area where civil disobedience worked. Enough people kept drinking despite the law and the social costs of banning alcohol (deaths from bathtub brews, alcohol cartels in the form of mafias, etc.) became severe enough that eventually the government relented and re-legalized alcohol use. In many cases prior to the end juries simply began exercising their right to nullification and refused to convict. Juries in northern states also refused to convict runaway slaves after the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act in protest of the law, this was the original argument for “state’s rights” before it became identified with slavery itself. In the modern era we see states ignoring Federal drug scheduling and legalizing cannabis anyway, and the federal government has been forced into a position where they comply despite their own laws.

                                                                                                                                          Beyond simply disregarding unjust laws when we can, we also need to develop systems of dual power to subvert the authority of the state in matters where it doesn’t belong through mutual aid, grey economies, and the like. Such (voluntary) structures could also fill in the power vacuum in the case of civil conflict and a collapse of official institutions. The lefties are better than we are at this IMO, not sure how we ourselves get there. Just an opinion.

                                                                                                                                          I’m not quite sure what you’re alluding to after civil disobedience, but echoing what Joe said, if things do ever get so bad that they devolve into armed conflict we need to be able to honestly say we expended all feasible civil options. It’s not only a tactical one, legitimizing the armed struggle, it’s a moral one. I just came back from a civil war not too long ago, climbing house to house through the wreckage of people’s lives while they struggle in refugee camps, they really suck if you’re living through it.

                                                                                                                                          I would say that I honor the US Constitution because so far it has been the strongest legal document in regards to preserving civil liberties, however flawed it may be. At the same time, I don’t worship it and would be very much open to a new legal framework that guarantees liberty further than the Constitution. (I’m not entirely convinced that the Articles couldn’t be salvaged.) I think our country could have avoided many of our current problems if it had treated African- and Native Americans as equals rather than subjects, but this is the reality we live in. That being said, if we were to try to craft a new Constitution from scratch under the current circumstances we’d have half the country begging for even more government with “positive” rights written throughout, so I think our current Constitution, restored to it’s most basic state, is the least-bad solution.

                                                                                                                                          Do remember that the Constitution gives us no rights, it only lists rights the federal government (and later, by extension, the states) is explicitly is barred from infringing upon. If your interest in liberty stems from the need to defend the Second Amendment you’re kind of approaching this backwards, your interest in the Second Amendment should be focused on the need to defend liberty.

                                                                                                                                          I would say that I still believe in some form of government, some kind of night watchman state, since we live in a world with state structures that would quickly invade if we abandoned the state altogether, otherwise I’d probably be some kind of anarchist, which at this point I think is a perfectly coherent philosophically, if not in practice. In credit to the Founders, the idea of the right to bear arms was a means to reduce the need for a centralized military, but handicapped by a number of factors, including a fear of armed slave revolts.

                                                                                                                                          Off the top of my head I can mention prohibition as an area where civil disobedience worked. Enough people kept drinking despite the law and the social costs of banning alcohol (deaths from bathtub brews, alcohol cartels in the form of mafias, etc.) became severe enough that eventually the government relented and re-legalized alcohol use. In many cases prior to the end juries simply began exercising their right to nullification and refused to convict. Juries in northern states also refused to convict runaway slaves after the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act in protest of the law, this was the original argument for “state’s rights” before it became identified with slavery itself. In the modern era we see states ignoring Federal drug scheduling and legalizing cannabis anyway, and the federal government has been forced into a position where they comply despite their own laws.

                                                                                                                                          Beyond simply disregarding unjust laws when we can, we also need to develop systems of dual power to subvert the authority of the state in matters where it doesn’t belong through mutual aid, grey economies, and the like. Such (voluntary) structures could also fill in the power vacuum in the case of civil conflict and a collapse of official institutions. The lefties are better than we are at this IMO, not sure how we ourselves get there. Just an opinion.

                                                                                                                                          I’m not quite sure what you’re alluding to after civil disobedience, but echoing what Joe said, if things do ever get so bad that they devolve into armed conflict we need to be able to honestly say we expended all feasible civil options. It’s not only a tactical one, legitimizing the armed struggle, it’s a moral one. I just came back from a civil war not too long ago, climbing house to house through the wreckage of people’s lives while they struggle in refugee camps, they really suck if you’re living through it.

                                                                                                                                      Viewing 66 reply threads
                                                                                                                                      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.