Everyone needs to donate!
We cannot exist without you.
Keep Free Republic Alive with YOUR Donations!
Make a difference.
PLEASE Contribute Today!
Posted on 07/09/2015 4:32:08 PM PDT by mojito
...The operational plan I propose in the book is reasonably straightforward. The reasons that I think we are driven to that plan speak to some complex realities facing the United States in the second decade of the twenty-first century.
First, the operational plan: to make large portions of the Federal Code of Regulations unenforceable. I want to make government into an insurable hazard, like flood, fire, or locusts. The way I want to do it is through massive civil disobedience underwritten by privately funded defense funds.
[....]
That brings me to the ambitious proposition I want to defend tonight: we cannot use the normal political process to roll back the reach of government. By “cannot,” I mean it is “impossible,” and not just for now but for the remainder of America’s existence.
First, a clarification. We can use the normal political process to achieve many good changes in discrete policies in education, welfare, law enforcement, and a dozen other policy areas. Nothing I say is intended to belittle that noble effort. But we cannot meaningfully reduce the scope of government through the political process....
(Excerpt) Read more at newcriterion.com ...
Ok. What law of the feds does he suggest to be ignored first?
yes it is a good read and i hope that this is not the way things have to go down. The description of the civil disobedience sounds more like a third world county that survive in spite of the government.
country
11 million are in civil disobedience of 1920s minor paperwork law about entering the country without playing mother-may-I.
The left will be violent.
Prepare to double their bid.
Federalist/Anti-Federalist ping. Excellent article on getting the government back into its constitutional prison.
Well, granted Murray wasn’t too specific, but I gather he means any that are found to be petty and unreasonably burdensome - so I guess that means just about all of them.
Didnt finish the article.
Civil disobedience is not individual defiance supported by lawyers funded by collective donations and then publicity.
Civil disobedience is collective defiance of a specific law or other reprehensible regulation by a mass so large it overwhelmes the system to enforce it.
The three supreme cu_ts rulings are interesting and shocking but his plan is wrong headed. It is just another war by proxy where you pay your money for other men’s children to be killed so you can live your own shallow life unfettered.
Disagree. I thought it superficial.
See myother post above
You bring up a good point that intrigues me a great deal: Why is it that only the left is allowed to disregard the law with impunity - illegal immigration, sanctuary cities, etc. - and is then applauded for it? I, for one, am sick and tired of this one-way street. How about starting now with those Christian bakers in Oregon, and we just go and tell the rainbow-bedraped petty tyrants to sodomize themselves?
Thats Right!
Yes they will, as evidenced by the manner in which they speak and their willingness to harm property. Be prepared, everyone...
The money quote, IMHO: “The federal government was created with one overriding duty: to allow us to live freely as we see fit, as long as we accord the same right to everyone else. It has betrayed that duty.”
Indeed so. And I feel a deep hunger now for the mystery man. I’m happy to feel it; for a time following the SCOTUS decisions, I felt despair. Hunger is definitely a better sensation. I’m really glad I read this. Thanks for posting it.
Defiance is close to being an individual thing, in that these movements involve a small minority of more-adventurous people. Only a small minority defied the Brits at Lexington and at Concord bridge. The defense fund is a useful way to reduce the risk for these individuals and thereby increase the number who will participate. Certainly, large numbers are preferable, as you say — this proposal helps make that number large.
Charles Murray is an American treasure. Unfortunately most Americans don't realize how much good work he has put into detailing the nature of the problems suffered by the US and some potential solutions.
However, this particular plan is not a solution. The US government can wait out any privately funded operation. All it will mean is justification for the Feds to hire more lawyers to issue more subpoenas.
True civil disobedience would be violating the law and not defending oneself. And the only way that would have any effect is if a bunch of people did it all at the same time.
I've stated this in another post. I personally don't have the charisma to do it, but what we need is someone with a lot of charisma to get a huge percentage of productive US citizens to go on a strike. Don't go to work. Buy as little as necessary to get by. See what happens.
An easier thing to accomplish might be for people, regardless of their religious affiliation, to once again "make holy the sabbath". No work and no buying one day a week ... and no extra working/buying during the week to make up for it. If the US economy loses a chunk of sales then that might send some sort of message.
Also purchasing as much as can be purchased from local retailers rather than large corporation. Anything to send some sort of signal to the Feds and their corporate lackeys that we're sick and tired of the direction the US is headed in.
In a materialistic culture the only thing of real value is money. It's long past time to moralize and edify. All we can do is kick the bastards in their bottom lines.
They know they can do this and get away with it because the vast majority of the American people are basically a peaceful lot. They know they can do just about anything and get away with it because there are no personal consequences to their actions.
I believe this quote kind of sums it up:
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.” ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Until it becomes personally dangerous for these people to operate, nothing whatsoever will change. Until we, as Americans start collectively shrugging our shoulders or applauding when some tax collector or bureaucrat dies of sudden lead poisoning, nothing we do will have any effect. The feral beast has grown so mad and vicious with it's power that there is really not another way to deal with it. We're way beyond peaceful change, and until that is widely recognised, in the words of Stephen Vincent Benet "Our children know and suffer the armed men."
I use the term "feral" government advisedly, because there is really only one thing you can do with a feral animal.
Suing the Federal government into bankruptcy is a good idea, except for one problem- it already is. Nobody wants to call it that- its a ‘deficit’ or some other euphemism for insolvency, but a government as far in the hole as ours is merely faking solvency.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.