Skip to comments.The Republic, if We Can Keep It (CW2)
Posted on 03/29/2012 5:56:51 AM PDT by Travis McGeeEdited on 03/29/2012 6:02:43 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
With its uninterrupted history of peaceful transition of power through elections, America has a multitude of citizens who justifiably feel pride in the strength of their democracy. But it cannot be denied that political tensions are rising, and it is not uncommon for occupants of both ends of the political spectrum to voice fears of (or hopes for) revolution. Is there any reason to believe that the republic is in danger of revolutionary activity?
Agreed. I just can’t imagine a political solution that keeps the damn from breaking.
Then again, I never thought, with our heritage, that we’d get here.
A source of protein if nothing else.
There is Fort Sumter, Colonel. The Lieutenant is ready to touch off the cannon. What do you say to him? Are you ready? I am sure not. CW2 would be a bloodbath, a horrible searing scarring trauma, and probably the end of the USA. I think we need to keep fighting the Cold Civil War. If it goes hot, we will all be losers.
The dam, either.
Cyber is the high ground today.
The Gramscians and Alynskyites (the same one-world Marxist crowd) had a terrificly effective game plan, and multi-generational patience. While we were all making a living, they won the “Long March Through the Institutions.” At the critical phase, they control most of the levers of power.
We’ll be damn lucky if the damn dam don’t bust right while we’re standing here looking up at that little seeping crack down the middle.
That die has already been cast. They have already declared war against us and fired the first shots. Time and again...
Ruby Rodge. Waco. Elian Gonzalez. People die in outright illegal raids by government agents weekly....
Some don’t. The Hutaree and David Olfson. Red’s Trading Post. David Sarti...
Is it STILL a “cold” war just because we haven’t fought back?
I’m trying to come up with a list of tests. One would be, “Are Rush, Sean, Laura, Michael, Mark and the rest still free to rant their spleens on national radio shows?”
As long as they are, I’d say we’re still mostly free. If teh left finds a way to silence them, I’d make a big check mark in the box.
And I’m still free to write and sell “radical anti-government” novels.
If you have any other freedom markers, I’d be happy to add them to my list.
“Well be damn lucky if the damn dam dont bust right while were standing here looking up at that little seeping crack down the middle.”
Not to mention all the diseases.
I'm not sure that is a legitimate test. It shows a reliance on deterministic thinking (which is historically justifiable) while our opponents show they are very comfortable operating within a stochastic framework.
There's a reason articulate radio voices get largely ignored, while the mostly amorphous Tea Party activity is treated like an insurrection.
Modern politics, for all practical purposes, is a specialized branch of "marketing and advertising" when understood as a social science.
Coke and Pepsi have no desire, indeed they have very good reason NOT to desire, the elimination of their statistically insignificant competitors. As long as such "competitors" exist, certain hands will be stayed that would otherwise be working against these quasi-monopolies.
If we want to save our way of life, we need to start punishing "intent and dissent" as well as "action." That's how our opponents have been so successful.
They aren’t free. Much evidence they’ve been (or a bunch of media people) threatened.
I would not call them “free”.
Be free from unreasonable search and seizure?
Can worship as I see fit and my Church dictates its own policies as how it runs the congregations business?
My home is my castle and I can modify it how I want as long as it doesn’t endanger my neighbors?
I can own and carry my personal armaments anywhere I have a legal right to be?
Am I free of unreasonable taxation that takes my wealth and gives it to someone who did not earn it and gives no value to me in return?
But sh*t, we can spout off in guarded tone on the Internet so we MUST be free...
That’s not a good looking list.
If you actually cut government spending, this is not inflationary. The money supply can be inflated purposefully and it probably will be for any sort of solution for our overspending problem. This will hurt everybody and some more than others but it can be used to inflate away part of our overspending.
No. But it is the unvarnished truth.
It’s one of my more annoying strong points.
I must analyse your post further, papertyger. I suspect more — and deeper — truths exist in there than initial scanning might imply. Wonderful and terrifying realizations may result.
Our nation at the time of the founders was largely a God-fearing nation, people who had self discipline because they were disciplined by the love and fear of the Lord. (Not perfect by any means, but fearing God.)
No evil Marxist philosophy or progressive subversion can be successful when people fear only the Lord, not other men. The people are not ruled by greed, or laziness, or desire for fame or power. They fear only God and know they must answer to Him. (Matthew 10:28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell) That is the only way our country ever worked.
But when the majority of Americans began turning away to a liberal version of Christianity in the early 1900s, or a pop culture version of evangelicalism by the 1970s, 1980s cheap, easy grace with no commitment to obey God, that left a vacuum in mens hearts, souls and minds. Then it was easy to fill Americans minds with the latest socialist propaganda.
Welfare never would have had a chance in the 1800s. Why? Not because conservatives could politically beat out the socialists or had better marketing or more organized political parties. It was that normal people, probably 99% of American society (even atheists had pretty similar morals), believed that taking charity was a sin! For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. 2 Thessalonians 3:9-11
It also violated several of the 10 commandments. Exodus 20:15 You shall not steal. Exodus 20:17 You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor’s.
The majority of people in this country were pretty close to being on the same page spiritually and morally. You just couldnt sell the depraved ideas of the socialists, people could not be spiritually deceived like that, they could see right through it, that it originated not from the Progressives or Socialists, but from the Father of Lies himself.
Not so now. Partly by the huge influx of immigrants from non Christian countries, but even more by just Christians being lukewarm and disobedient and pastors caring more about building megachurches with all the latest entertainment than about preaching the Word clearly.
While I see the possibility of war, I am very, very concerned that it may turn out more like the French Revolution than the first American Revolution, simply because the hearts of so many of the people here in America have changed, not nearly as many love and fear the Lord.
God gave us a warning in Deuteronomy, and I believe, as the Puritans did, that this still applies to us today.
Deuteronomy 30:15 See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. 16 If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you today, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it. 17 But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, 18 I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish. You shall not live long in the land that you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess. 19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live, 20 loving the LORD your God, obeying his voice and holding fast to him, for he is your life and length of days, that you may dwell in the land that the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them. (The last several chapters of Deuteronomy gives the full details of these warnings.)
Cloward and Piven,The Frankfurt School, Saul Alinsky, these are all examples of an attack not just on what we believe but an attack on how we think. Once we are brought to the point where we cannot trust our own judgment, the game is over and we cannot discriminate between good and evil, right and wrong, left and right.
At this point we have entered a world of nihilism and cynicism and we instinctively flee to the safe harbors of tribalism and emotionalism. Not surprisingly, these are the predominant characteristics of the world of the left.
Add the satisfying human emotional feedback of succumbing to the herd instinct so predominant in collectivism, and you have the current condition not just of downtown Detroit but of Harvard Green.
And why the left's leading intellectual lights, be they activists, economists, or comedians, are consumed almost exclusively with the practice and craft of deconstructionism.
The mind that has been cut free from the moorings of traditional values and reasoning will "rise up" for NOTHING except a reasonably articulate sophist proposing a barely plausible, but emotionally satisfying narrative, for how the listener is being cheated by some diabolical "power broker."
This is the concept of 1984 -- the attack on the process (and even the capacity) of thought. How much better it would be, to defeat an opponent's very mind? Is this not the essence of Sun Tsu's major work, The Art of War?
To quote the movie 300, "Come, let us reason together."
Truthfully, I would welcome your input on any of the upcoming 'serious' editorials I will be crafting.
Thanks, Laz, for the Leonidas visual that brought my attention to NB’s post.
Naturally, we’re among the small percentage that will never run with herd.
You post is exactly right. I would only put Gramsci ahead of the Frankfurt School and Alinsky. He realized early on that Lenin’s menthod would not work in Europe and America. First, the populations needed to be unmoored from their cultural and religious underpinnings. Destroy the belief in a people’s culture, history and religion, and they won’t even defend themselves against Marxist subversion, especially if the subversion is covert and always couched in the language of democracy. And Gramsci was 100% correct. The Left has succeeded in its “long march through the institutions.” Our options are few and our prognosis grim.
I view them as opportunities to excel and I have optimism that a few good men can change a lot.
I've seen it up close and personal where I work. I singlehandedly changed a very large, very intransigent policy. You know my employer so you know the magnitude of that accomplishment.
Optimism, and always try to raise morale of the troops!
Yep, we ain’t quitting.
The idea isn't over, but it has been little used in practice for 170 years.
It has been increasingly marred by cronyism and corruption, and of late by the 'special interest group', a division created to fragment those who should all be concentrating on our mutual benefit as a nation instead.
A house divided against itself cannot stand, yet the enemies of this Republic have succeeded wildly in crafting those divisions, often from the offices which should eschew them, as their oaths bind them to so do.
I agree. I think they will push until they think they can't push any more, and if that isn't enough, things may go hot.
If that happens, it must be stomped, as hard, fast, and completely as possible. Keep in mind that media accounts may well be completely distorted, and limiting that might be a worthwhile objective.
The RKBA. Any new infringements should raise a flag.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees that. More like the terror than Cornwallis' Surrender...
Frankly, given the "contours of the battlespace," I'd call it a primary objective.
>Is it STILL a cold war just because we havent fought back?
No, it is a slaughter in that case.
>If you have any other freedom markers, Id be happy to add them to my list.
The ability to wear your firearm as you serve on a jury.
(Reason: The police, and security officers, have no affirmative obligation to the safety of any [particular] private citizen [meaning you] as per USSC rulings; your absence in reporting for jury duty is punishable in itself; therefore, your disarmament is depriving you of your right to defend yourself in a coerced manner. Further, it assumes that you are a criminal, or otherwise ‘unworthy,’ before any such judgement is made.)
Good list, even if it is by turns angering and depressing.