This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Organizing Against Tyranny
Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market blog,
My work and my thoughts lately have turned toward a now constant focus on the concepts of organization, more in respect to underlying philosophy rather than hard, fast rules and structures. If you are one of the slithering acolytes of political theory elitist Saul Alinsky (and you haven’t felt the inclination to jump face first into the nearest punji pit), then the primary tool of organization for you is to lie, and to lie often. Tricking people into action using false premises, telling people what they want to hear rather than opening their eyes to reality, is perhaps the easiest way to build a movement. Of course, that movement will eventually destroy itself as the lies begin to inhibit progress rather than inspire it. But in most cases, by the time the organization self-destructs it has already been exploited for the nefarious purpose it was intended.
For the liberty movement, the movement against globalization and forced centralization of financial and political power, lies are simply not an option. The internationalists have already cornered the market on lies, so we must take a completely contrary approach. We must organize around the truth, no matter how painful it happens to be. This is a much more difficult prospect, one many people don’t understand or appreciate.
There are a lot of complaints in the movement about the lack of what they consider effective organization, and the frustration is in some ways beginning to evolve into fear. Here are some core inconsistencies I believe are at the heart of organizational problems within the liberty movement and what we can do to solve them.
Re-examining Our Concept Of Real Organization
For multiple generations, Americans and most of the rest of the world have been conditioned to believe that organization is a top-down affair that requires a central leadership that hands orders across the ranks of a rigid structure. The people within the structure operate as parts of a greater machine, and the success of the machine is (supposedly) directly related to how close the smaller parts (people) work together and follow those orders. Unfortunately, many activists in the liberty movement also assume that this is what an organization is and how it works.
Surely, there is a need for people with a talent to inspire others to thought and to action. But these men and women are nothing unless they can motivate individuals to eventually take their own initiative without orders. A true leader is a teacher — nothing more. And if he really cares about the future prosperity of the people he is teaching, that teacher’s objective will be for his students to exceed his own capabilities and to become independent in their accomplishments.
For a movement driven by a desire for the preservation of freedom and sovereignty, organization requires structure, but not rigidity or centralized leadership. The collectivist model of the human machine or hive is a flawed model that oppresses individual contributions that could be revolutionary. The corporate model, for instance, is a perfect example of an organization built mostly on lies (just look at the inconsistencies of real debts versus real profits for most major companies) and that fuels itself on the integration of people as replaceable gears and bolts on a rusted, shuddering Ferris wheel ride. Corporations might appear to make money, but they never meet their ultimate potential as organizations because most of the people within them could not care less about the purpose or even health of the system as long as they continue to draw a paycheck. When an organization merely limps along on the thin thread of the survival principle, this is the opposite of success.
The liberty movement has to abandon outmoded and ill-conceived notions of mainstream organizational models and take more stock in decentralized activity. A lack of an arbitrarily designated pecking order or the pyramid scheme of top-down branching management is a good thing for our cause, not a disadvantage.
Legitimate Structure And Purpose
Just because a movement is decentralized does not mean it should lack a foundation, and that foundation should be composed of a primary purpose and a primary plan of action. This is where some liberty activists seem to become most nihilistic in their thinking.
They have been looking for top-down leadership, which doesn’t exist and shouldn’t exist. They have been looking for a set plan of attack, which no one can seem to agree on. And they moan relentlessly about what they see as the lack of a singular, universal vision of what the ultimate goal should be. I have heard the argument more than once that the liberty movement will fail because victory would require us to all agree on one ideological vision and a rather singular strategy. What they don’t appear to realize is that a vision and strategy already exist that most of us agree on.
Again, our society has been conditioned to see through only a very narrow window of what constitutes organization that demands we adhere to the top-down philosophy. However, most liberty activists already agree on the bottom-up goal of self-reliance and self-sufficiency in all things, from food and water to education, security and governance.
There will be no mass majority movement on Washington in a “V for Vendetta”-style march led by some heroic masked man. And even if there were, it would accomplish nothing unless the top of the globalist pyramid was toppled (Occupy Wall Street is a good example of how such theatrics fail). This goal of a mass awakening is a common fantasy and an impractical one; but self-sufficiency, mutual aid and mutual defense are realistic efforts, given the likely short amount of time we have left. The universal vision is right in front of our faces and always has been: to break away from the corrupt mainstream system, to remove our dependency, to provide our own necessities and, thus, to remove our consent.
Every liberty proponent in America should be able to pursue this goal without prompting from any centralized leadership, and it encompasses every aspect of the fight against tyranny. Make your family self-sufficient and secure without aid of government. Make your neighborhood self-sufficient and secure. Make your town or county self-sufficient and secure. If the elites try to stop you, fight back and from a position on the moral high ground. If enough communities defend themselves the prospect of martial law or totalitarian control becomes systemically impossible, politically and strategically. I rarely run into liberty advocates who disagree with this plan, yet they do nothing and refuse to even make the attempt because they are still waiting around for someone to give them a plan. Stop waiting around for the next Gandhi or George Washington and do what you already know needs to be done. It is truly as simple as that.
Changing Our Idea Of Leadership
As stated earlier, you do not need a man on a white horse to ride in and save you from the terrifying idea of self-responsibility. If you are waiting for someone to come down off the mountain with magical stone tablets and lead you to the promised land, you are going to find yourself rather disappointed. Despite popular belief, men do not organize other men; only ideas given focus organize men. Men rally around that which they love or that which they hate. Leadership is often incidental, or sadly, manipulative.
So, by extension, we can conclude that to develop a strong organization, the ideal must be honest and honorable, the plan must be decentralized and natural for individuals to implement, and those who coordinate the organizational efforts must do so with the realization that they are stewards of the principles of that movement and that those principles are more important than their glory. If activists plan to become followers of anything, it should be solid principles. Leaders are secondary.
Destructive Egomania
In my time in the movement, I have seen relatively good men with sound ideals exhibit insane behavior and absurd motives when exposed to a mere 15 minutes of fame. Ego is truly the greatest Achilles’ heel of any activist organization. This is a fact that corrupt governments are highly aware of.
If you look into the history of the FBI’s subversive Cointelpro efforts from the 1950s onward, you will find a common tactic used to dismantle anti-establishment groups, which is to sow discord among organizers and coordinators by feeding egos and turning them against each other. Like the ring of power in the “Lord of The Rings” books, the desire for leadership can blind people to the greater cause. They develop delusions of grandeur, thinking they are the next guru, the next prophet, the next man to lead the charge to permanent historical stardom. Each person believes that if only he had the ring, if only he were the leader, he could resist the temptations of power and achieve what others could not. And so he refuses to work with others or to share the stage, or he even attempts to subvert or co-opt the legitimate accomplishments of more capable men.
The only solution is to cast off the ring forever, to care nothing for the supposed glories of leadership and to work only for the betterment of others.
I have also seen people within the movement fall victim to the admiration of their own fan base. Positive feedback from readers is certainly helpful, but I would be writing everything I write now even if every email I received were laced with vitriol (sometimes they are). The truth does not require fans; it functions fine without them. Liberty champions do, on occasion, receive letters of adoration — from being compared to Thomas Paine all the way to being labeled the next Jesus (the former being flattering and the latter being just plain weird). The problem is not public appreciation; it is the cult of celebrity that many Americans have grown too attached to, as well as the fact that some activists in more public positions have a hard time handling positive attention without their heads expanding 10 sizes too big.
The fact is I don’t matter, liberty leaders and personalities don’t matter, the limelight doesn’t matter, and the level of our fan base doesn’t matter. All that matters is how effectively and efficiently we can get the facts to the public. Organization suffers when the cult of celebrity takes over, whether in the minds of activists or in the minds of the people who represent them in the media.
Fear Of Risk Leads To Inaction
In my work with groups such as Oath Keepers and its Community Preparedness Team program, I have taken what some might consider sizable risks, and I have witnessed others who have gone even further. And in this risk I have seen the kinds of progress in organization I have never seen anywhere else. Without risk, there can be no organization against tyranny and, thus, no chance of success. If you are afraid to be put on the naughty list in the National Security Agency database, if you are afraid you might lose your job, if you are afraid you might be labeled an “extremist” or if you are afraid of uneducated public perception and this has prevented you from building mutual aid and defense groups where you live, then you have already lost everything. Fear leads to inaction, and inaction is death.
I have even witnessed members of organizations attempt to prevent others from taking positive measures like training for community defense because they are so fearful of what might happen due to their affiliation they will actually work against the better goals of the people around them. All I can say is that fear-driven people have to be removed from organizational environments, or they will poison the waters until the entire venture flatlines. Risk is inevitable. It is unavoidable. All anti-establishment, anti-tyranny movements depend on it. The more people willing to take risks, the more effectively “safe” that risk becomes. This includes the fear of defense and the fear of losing one’s life in the process. Every scenario, even the worst-case scenario, has to be considered and then set aside as irrelevant. Fear has no place in the minds or actions of liberty champions. Remove fear, and world-changing organization becomes possible.
»
- 20054 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Quaecumque vera
Quem deus vult perdere, dementat prius.
'Merica!
'Merica, -ae, -ae, -am, -a
Please IR...
Brian: It says, "Romans go home!"
Centurion: No it doesn't.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIAdHEwiAy8
call the lemmings to revolt
you know it's a trap don't you?
http://investmentwatchblog.com/1929-recession-depression-currency-war-tr...
I do not believe that "Truth" has a chance in our political system as itstands now. And "TruthTellers" will end up in jail and/or in financial ruin before most of us ever hear what their truth may have been.
For truth to be heard and for TruthTellers to be heeded, we need to return to the way we regulated the purveyors of mass media before REAGAN became president:
For truth tellers to gain a reasonable chance to win elections, the pooling of money for the purpose of funding political campaigns and shaping public opinion regarding political candidates and political issues must be eliminated.
The intent should be to provide equal opportunity for free speech (Truth-telling or what passes for it) and political advocacy.
Who said anything about winning elections?
If you want to compete with or beat top performers in any field of endeavor, you have to meet and exceed their attributes of success. This is a universal and immutable law in Nature, period.
So it is with TPTB. They are: Informed, Smart, Motivated, Organized, Secretive, Courageous, Relentless.
The trail of losers they leave behind are Uninformed, Dumb, Lazy, Scared, Disorganized and Solitary souls.
Laws of human nature and natural selection at work.
TPTB are perhaps academically intelligent but not necessarily wise, which is the true mark of "smart" people. Therefore, they will fail in the end, mainly because they do not have insight, and only see the lurid surface of their endeavors, not to mention, they are psychopathic, and those without conscience suffer a destructive bias and eventually face the consequences.
They are also utter cowards, they constantly hide behind lies, and use the sheeple portion of the population as cannon fodder so that they never have to actually fight their own battles. I will say they are motivated and organized, but motivated by what? Organized around what? Only the superficial desire for power and control. Such a pursuit, no matter how well organized, is a poisonous and self -destructive affair. The laws of natural selection will fall upon the elitists far more quickly than they realize. They'll all be hanging from lamp posts by the end of this thing, mark my words, and the funny thing is, they won't see it coming despite all their supposed "intelligence".
This is a great motivational speech, but isn't it about time we started talking in at least vague specifics? You don't even provide any evidence your claims are true - it's just that we all want to accept them as such, or else we're facing pretty long odds. What we need to do is organize - not to atomize and then live off of theories. I'm sorry to be so negative, but seriously - we can't just talk about how bad the other guys are...we all know that. Hell, they are evil, but capable. We need to find our capabilities.
I'm discussing how "bad" they are because the above poster is displaying a worshipful attitude towards them. It's called point-counterpoint. If you are looking for a discussion on capabilities, then maybe you should start that discussion instead of complaining about how no one is discussing what you would personally like to discuss. Makes sense, right?
You said more than "they're bad", and it is to those other statements that we respond.
WRONG. And ALL of recorded human history is proof.
-----
To be slightly more specific, I'll say this.
As long as predators have LOTS of prey to feed upon, and...
As long as their prey doesn't wisely, smartly fight back diligently...
PREDATORS ALWAYS WIN.
Furthermore, it cannot be otherwise. For some of the main reasons, read a few of my posts from the last 24 hours.
-----
Yes, they are cowards. And yes, they would pee their pants if thousands of people with torches stormed their estates. But billions of their prey have been giving them tens of trillions of dollars for decades (even millennia), and they've spent a fair bit of that on weapons in the hands of their paid-thug mercenaries (cops, military).
When is the last time you saw thousands of people with torches storm an estate in any western country.
<insert sound of crickets chirping>
"What is Truth?"
Soros funded, Canadian-based idea of the US Occupy movement. (why would a nation's citizen's have to "occupy" anything since it is their soil?). Occupied territory is an oxymoron for a citizen to use as a banner... And why would they want to occupy wall street? We are being played in a maze-like game.
“The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government.” Chester Ward, Rear Admiral and former Navy Judge Advocate 1956 – 1960 and a CFR member for 15 years
Those in power have already branded any kind of counter-government activity as "terrorist". Free speech is alright as long as it leads to no action. Action's alright, as long as it is disorganized and participants can be singled out, dealt with and discredited individually. Organization can happen as long as it does not involve meaningful action or spreads ideas. Gathering in large numbers to promote stupidity and ignorace (ie: watching superbowl or sending kids to public schools) is not only allowed, but actively enouraged. Some events may even be combined as long as they happen out of sequence or in reverse order. Quoting George Carlin: "You can say you pricked your finger, you just can't say you fingered your prick".
Gun ownership is legal, as long as you only use the guns to protect yourself from your fellow human beings and not from power-tripping law enforcement, corrupt politicians or greedy bankers. You have the choice of either no freedom, half-freedom, or pretend-freedom.
True freedom would mean the ability to exercise all right simultaneously and not 1 at a time at some barb-wire fenced, government-designated free speech zone somewhere between Block A and Block C in Guantanamo.
An exercise in liberty would involve:
1. Exercising the freedom of speech to discuss political issues online, eventually concluding that talking ain't gonna solve shit.
2. Using freedom of assembly to gather and come up with an actual action plan.
3. Using freedom to conduct commerce in order to barter and trade to gather resources and financing.
4. Using the right to bear arms to amass weapons using financing acquired under section 3.
5. Using freedom to safe from harm at your property while accumulating weapons and gear collected under section 4.
6. Using the property mentioned in section 5 to building and train "a well regulated Militia", as outlined in Article 4 of The Bill of Rights.
6. Using freedom of transportation to gather from every corner of this great land in order to storm state governments buildings in order to provide much needed irrigation for the proverbial Tree Of Liberty...
... until no other article of The Bill of Rights or The Constitution is violated by them power-hungry, self-entitled, money-worshiping motherfuckers!
I think I'm too old for truth. How bout a lettuce and tomato cheeseburger and then a nap.
Yup, a leaderless revolution is exactly what the USSA needs. And we need it now, not later, 'cuz if we don't do this now it will never come to fruition. Without a leaderless revolution we are truly all fucked.
I like this article, it raises real issues of organization that are too frequently ignored. I can empathize with the anti-hierarchy sentiments, because in principle hierarchies are the structures on which oppressive states carry out their business. Indeed, a critique of such structures allows one to criticize communism and the current regimes in the West - hell this author even goes after Occupy. However, there is a lot of confusion in this article. The author decries Occupy Wall Street as a bit of theatrics...I actually understood that it failed because of it's ridiculous "consensus"/no-leaders method of making no/horrible decisions - which then allowed it to be targeted very easily by the current cointelpro regime in place. And speaking of the original cointelpro - the author does point out that charismatic leaders and a focus on individuals is what allowed cointelpro to infiltrate, but that doesn't mean hierarchies were the cause.
I don't want to be too critical because the article contains more intelligent things on this topic than we usually see (especially on ZH). However, to just decry hierarchies and talk about the dissolution of ego - it rings of the real political theory detachment from reality that author attacks. What do I mean? Just think about it - the enemy we face is organized - it's tightly organized - it's hierarchically organized. That is one of their main weapons - structure and command and control. However, because such command and control often facilitates oppression, the author wants to reject it. This is as about as intelligent (IMHO) as rejecting guns, because they tend to kill. If we expand the analogy of a battle, let's talk about hierarchy like an engineered and assembled tank. The enemy is rolling with plenty of these machines, while the author - out of fear of machines being associated with evil - wants to reject them. Will we really get anywhere if we fight an enemy of tanks by running as individuals toward them, out of fear of driving our own tanks? (Iran lost 10s of thousands this way)
It's fun to imagine laboratory conditions for struggle, in which we can implement the cleanest theoretical conditions...but that's just not reality. We need to have hierarchical organization or we just get crushed. NOW - that's not to say that there aren't a robust set of protections which can't be put in place to prevent the hierarchy from taking over. These are things like "instant recall" where any leaders can be majority voted out at any time. There are safe-guards like the separation of personal and political (suppression of egos!) - in which operating in the political or field of battle is separated from our personal relations, to prevent favoritism and cliques, but also to prevent the government from infiltrating groups by the manipulation of rumors and opinions. A simple example - if you're going to protest or confront the authorities - do it as a group and don't associate with ur partner or child in this setting - it opens you up for infiltration. The enemy will leverage your weaknesses in organized groups, but if you're not organized - they will totally atomize you and separate you. An organization can be robust and secure if it is run with seriousness and committment. There are histories of movements from which to learn about these techniques - that's why it's better to study the history of revolutionary movements in practice, and not just form strategy based on abstract ideas based on principles.
That said - the author is spot on about needing to take shared risk in your group - that leaders are secondary - that egos get in the way. I wouldn't follow a theory unless someone was showing me some historical movements as a point of reference though. I guess this is why communists are so hated here...they actually study and cite to history, which is always dirty and leaves one more unsatisfied than pure abstract libertarianism.
You're right in a lot of ways, but also remember some counter-examples. Like how dispersed, not top-down-organized guerrilla warfare wreaks havoc on classic top-down military organization. Just look at how overwhelming the advantage in organization, weaponry, funding and technology the USSA has had since Vietnam... and yet... all they can do is kill people, not conquer them. That is, those who refuse to be conquered.
Individualists (or simply "royally pissed off people") don't need fancy, complex top-down organization. They need to understand one basic message... let's kill the bastards and steal and destroy their stuff, and do so in ways that put us at minimum risk.
I've mentioned the following very important principle (and unavoidable fact of reality) several times before in ZH messages:
DESTRUCTION IS VASTLY MORE POTENT THAN PRODUCTION
And this may be (along with brainwashing humans with endless bogus fictions) the most effective piece of information of all. Think about it.
How much time, effort, skills, expertise and resources are needed to build, furnish and decorate a really nice comfortable home?
Answer: LOTS.
How much time, effort, skills, expertise and resources are needed to destroy that wonderful home?
Answer: NEAR ZERO.
What was built in a year with great effort and expertise and expense, is destroyed with one minute of effort, a free pack of matches (plus $2 worth of gasoline if you want to go "expensive"), no skills, no expertise, no resources.
DESTRUCTION IS POWERFUL
And destruction (plus fiction) is the main weapon of the predators, those you we all wish to eliminate.
YOU CANNOT WIN... unless you adopt equally efficient approaches.
Which means, you need to adopt destruction against the destroyers, or you have zero chance to defeat them or eliminate them. You can still evade them for a short number of additional years, if you're willing to "get outta dodge", meaning FAR, FAR, FAR outta dodge and get self-sufficient. But if you want to defeat them or eliminate them, you MUST take advantage of their weapon. You must destroy them. You must destroy their vehicles. You must destroy their buildings. You must destroy everything they need to intimidate you and harm you.
Otherwise, just give the hell up, because YOU LOSE. Period. No matter what kind of organization they or you adopt. You're dead meat. But again, you can still go and hide. That's still possible with plausible effort.
-----
Another comment about "organization" that meshes with my last few paragraphs. If someone was to attempt to organize the resistance, they must plan to do everything in dispersed manner, and in utterly unconventional ways.
You'd have to take every advantage of their way of doing things that you can, and only take actions that involve very low risk (of identification and of bodily harm).
Examples: Well, remember. To execute their scheme, many of them must wear uniforms. There is another word for "uniform", spelled "target". Plus, you know where their people hang out (government buildings, cop stations, etc). You know which vehicles they drive (many have signs and almost all have comprehensible license plates). If the predators-that-be no longer have paid-thug enforcers, their entire scheme collapses. And by the nature of their scam, they are easy to identify from long distances (given optical aids, including many with cross-hairs). The rest is easy to figure out.
I won't even mention in any detail what happens when you take cheapo quadcopters, some of which already have fairly long-range remote control capabilities, (complete with video feedback in some cases), attach tiny projectile-projecting devices (with wireless video feedback), and just fly them to places where they are very difficult to see... and have them stare at place with lines of sight from very few if any directions. I'm sure you can think of a few you drive past every day. Well, you get the picture. This is called low-risk, massively asymmetric guerrilla warfare.
-----
The bottom line is, what is required is not much organization, but action. And smarts. Not some "off the cuff" action, but planning, building, testing, and action. Like people do in some parts of the world to defend themselves and their neighbors against invaders from places like the USSA. Those poor bastards don't have 1% of the resources people in the USSA have, and they do a fairly good job. Why? Because they don't allow themselves to get suckered into playing the same game as the organized military does (and almost has to given their goals).
This is serious business. Best to decide "I'm in", or "too real for me, I'm out". My decision was "I'm out", mostly because I did not see any evidence anyone would become willing to get real, and take serious action to defend themselves against the most evil and destructive predators the world has ever known. Mostly because they're too brainwashed to understand how simple the whole issue is. It is, predators versus producers. The predators refuse to work, and demand you (or someone) produce everything they need to live 10x to 1000x better than you. And the producers produce, and hand over the vast majority of what they produce. While the parasites exchange votes for a few crumbs left over after the predators feasts on the bulk.
And the point is, the entire liberty movement is utterly POINTLESS, even counterproductive, unless they eventually decide to stand up and fight it out... to the death, to the end. Otherwise you might as well resign yourselves to being overt abused slaves, because for absolute certain, the predators will not back down. It is you or them. Decide. Hide, give in, or fight to the death (and fight smart, and make machines do your fighting if you have any brains).
And as for history, I'm sure history has many lessons. Including this one. Never in history have human predators been persuaded to step down. And they never will. That is not in their nature. Period. So learn that lesson first. Then decide. Then live with your decision. Or just spend your life feeling miserable and abused, which you are.
Very good! Agreed on all points and I think that's the way it is going to play out. The only thing missing is the "Lexington Moment". That spark that sets the whole thing off. The Bundy Ranch, was very close to that. You had a huge standoff, with an army of Federal agents, including Special Forces operators (lime Daniel Love), against a well armed militia. It was one rifle shot away. Imagine if that shot got fired? First, the immediate outcome, with a very high likelihood of violence. Then like ripples though a pond, you'd have secondary and tertiary effects. The informed and willing among the steeple, will know that it is "On".
To Honestann, and to STP below, I really enjoyed reading that good common sense. One vital thing I thing has been missing in all the conversation I have read so far - hearts and minds of the people.
To take out sources of oppressive power, or at least intimidate, confuse and distract them is fine, great actually. But, it really is essential to proceed thoughtfully so as to render a significant proportion of bystanders to become sympathetic to your actions. You will need folks to protect and hide you, to provide moral and material support for your actions, to help grow the movement of passive support and action from among those who still have at least one foot in the matrix, as it were.
So, just blowing stuff up and killing people in a way that allows the populace to be misled to believe that you are the enemy, well, that's just counterproductive to any lasting objective of positive change.
And that is a big problem in the USSA still... vastly too many people are "predator sympathizers"... or just react automatically and cluelessly as they've been programmed. So anyone involved would need to remain anonymous, and any "cells" formed would need to remain tiny and isolated so breaches by agents of the predators would be limited to one cell. But, hey, I'm not planning anything... I gave up and escaped the battlefield.
But "just saying", I had an impossible time seeing how anything could work in the USSA, largely for the reasons you mention.
Obviously this is not the case in some parts of the world... perhaps Ukraine, perhaps places in eastern Europe, perhaps even Greece eventually. But I really don't know, because I've never had any personal interest or focus in "the old country" as some westerners call it. Though I was born Chinese and spent my first ~20 years there, my intellectual comfort zone was never Asia, never Europe... but the USSA (I thought... big mistake), and later quite a few places in the southern hemisphere, including most of the south-pacific, south-america, remote islands. And if I had more time and money to explore, I'm sure I would have found more interesting places in the southern hemisphere between australia and africa, including many remote places in africa. But, never got there.
The populace will always be 100% misled. Better count on that everywhere. Unfortunately, the humans in the USSA are naive beyond belief, and thus easier to mislead than anywhere else. Which DOES complicate any effort anyone might attempt someday, because you won't be able to just "duck into the nearest house" and expect someone to hide you or protect you. Just the opposite. But also, my comments were never meant to sound random, like "just blow stuff up". I wasn't even thinking of "blowing anything up" for the most part. Better to pour glue into the brake system of cars, or into the oil cap, or into the gas tank. Stuff like that destroys cars just as surely as a bomb, and with much less propaganda value for the predators.
But in the end, everything I say is pure theory, and my bottom line was... for the USSA surely, but perhaps not elsewhere... humans are finished, humans are a failed species, and the best good folks can do is probably to go hide out and create a good life for themselves where they're safe just because... they're out-of-sight, out-of-mind. That still can be done... for another generation or so. After that, we better have a way off this rock, or... VERY BAD NEWS.
Ann this is good stuff. In terms of how to organize combative resistance - you're right, there is no need (on the micro level) for hierarchies and all of that shit. Indeed, destruction is far more powerful than production. I'm totally with you on all of this. By the way, I very much realize that the predators won't step down - they only respond to the threat of violence. Psychopaths survive and rise to the top because they will hold a gun to the head of anyone who stands in their way, daring anyone to do something about it. Most people are either scared into submission or entranced by the psychopath's willpower.
I also now more fully understand your reasons for dropping out, Ann. It seems respectable if you've only seen failures. It seems very reasonable if all you've seen is Americans (sorry guys). There is a reason I left that place and it was primarily the sheepishness. I've been blessed to experience hope - communities of ordinary people confronting soldiers, laying down life and freedom, losing badly, but continuing to fight and winning. I've lost colleagues - many are in prison - Mrs. Upgrayedd was even in military prison for refusing BS orders. But you stand up and keep fighting and this is more than encouraging, it's true living. That phrase "animating contest of liberty" means a lot to me. However at the same time, it's clear in the past 10 years or so the US intelligence not only wages the tried and true pain compliance and threat system, but now they can predict events with their infiltration and they can change the future with knowledge and emotional manipulation on social networks. I'm suspicious of any movement now. It's just like any soldier - you have love for your brothers and would die for them, regardless of what the larger war-narrative is. I don't want to be coopted like that and so more and more I'm considering "pull an Ann". I put in some years of fight and suffer from too much PTSD. Maybe I just need a vaca.
You are correct. If I had seen others take real, serious, thoughtful steps and "risk all", I might have chosen otherwise. Not physically, but in the categories of tenacity and realism my behavior might have resembled that "former resistance fighther against the Cardassians" in StarTrek DS9 in the conflict that should already have started and ended. Can't remember her name, and personally didn't much like the actress, but the character was interesting.
But you're right. I saw what I saw, which was massive confusion, total inaction (beyond talk... now progressed to making youtube videos), and a complete lack of realism.
I have to say, the one and only counter-example that I know of, is what happened at Bundy Ranch in Nevada last year. I still have no freaking idea how that happened... how all of a sudden a bunch of real folks decided to show up with guns, get into the faces of the feds, and tell them to get the hell outta there or die.
I have no idea how that happened. And here I refer to logistics. Why did this happen, when nothing even remotely similar ever occurs anywhere else? I still have no idea.
I don't know where you live, but I sure have a lot of praise for your willingness to stick to your guns the best you can, and in practical ways, and take whatever actions you can. Because that's all it takes, in the end. Except, you need more comrades, and you all need to find the most efficient methods of operation against the enemies. And unless everyone firmly decides, "we're going to end this, and we're going to win no matter the cost"... the predators will always win. That's a tough commitment to make when most neighbors hide in their basements and support the predators (even if only out of fear). A very tough commitment.
My personality is to feel rather free to float around on this globe of earth... until the day I can permanently leave. And that has made the option called "get the hell outta dodge" easier for me than many. The fact that I figured things out young, and lived a super-frugal and super-productive life with almost ZERO waste or luxuries also let me accumulate about $400K (almost all gold) savings, and thereby have a way to set up a very comfortable place in the boonies for myself. Plus, I love solitude, and I love the extreme boonies, which not everyone does. But then again, while it is important (for most folks) to move somewhere rural (in my opinion), there is no need to be as remote as me... that's just me and my crazy tastes.
I hope people don't misunderstand me when I say "humans are finished", and "humans are a failed species". I didn't want to come to that conclusion, and I don't like that conclusion. But I'm an absolute hard-core realist, and 100% honest to myself from birth to... eternity hopefully. And so, I won't mislead myself, which means those claims are my honest opinions after a great deal of thought and evaluation.
The sad thing is, humans are quite capable. But at this point in history the predators have created such a thorough system of brainwashing via public [and private] schools, control of mainstream media, and quite probably chemical "dumbing-down" that... too few humans are aware what is happening, and too few of them are willing to "risk all" to defeat the human predators.
The human predators would be easy to defeat if even 2% of the population was as realistic, clear-headed and committed as we are. But we're several orders of magnitude short of 2%, and I don't see how 2% can be achieved... not even allowing for the mass-murder campaigns that would surely materialize if we started to approach 2%. So... humans are finished, humans are a failed species.
Which is why my focus is on options for just extremely tiny numbers of individuals to find ways to evade and avoid the predators-that-be for the next decade or three (mostly in far away places the predators don't [yet] care about, or lack the resources to monitor or control). And then make a leapfrog in just the right field of science, engineering and technology to sure our liberty forever. That's what I spend most of my waking hours doing, collaborating on that project.
Yes, it does sound like you need a vacation... a permanent vacation! You've done your part, and that AT LEAST gives you the right to step back and assess your situation. Unless you are confident you and your comrades can prevail, I advise you (and as many of them as you can influence), to find ways to save themselves. Don't try to "save the country", because "the people are already lost". Save yourselves. You are, after all, those who deserve to be saved.
I wish you the best of luck. Time to "shrug", take care of yourself, and in the process, remove your unwilling support from the "system" wherever you live. BTW, if you're willing to say, in what general part of the world do you live?
PS: If you're good at organization, maybe you should organize a group called "save ourselves" (or something catchier). Make plans to escape, find the best places to relocate, and get the hell out of your own version of dodge. That would be an extremely helpful parting contribution that most benefits those who most deserve.
The lie is the primary weapon of the current bankster regime. So like, Winston, we should learn to accept our Big Brother?
" A man will say just about anything when he is sportin' badger food for a pecker."-Pooh Bear
What is suggested is rarely achieved except by gunfire.
Choose carefully.
Even less ambitious ideas like a meritocracy do not succeed because people actually like the unfair advantages within the system
What does a meritocracy look like?
1) Everyone succeeds on their own merit.
2) No un-earned wealth and power, eg inheritance and hereditary titles
3) A uniform schools system with no private schools
But people want to pass on an inheritence to give their children an advantage (headstart) over others.
They are not really that keen on ideas of fairness.
Yes, power, status, control & money explain US Politics & wealth better than other models.
What do we call this, crony capitalism, or dystopiocracy?
- WORLD AWASH WITH MORE DEBT THAN BEFORE FINANCIAL CRISIS...
- Number of billionaires surges to record high...
- World's superrich own $3 trillion in homes...
- JEB JOLTS RACE WITH IMMIGRATION STAND...
- Past Bush Comments Shock Conservatives:
- 'Not possible' to 'completely control border'...
- 'Repopulate' Detroit with immigrants...
- 'Ridiculous' not to give 'accelerated citizenship' to young illegals...
- FLASHBACK: 1 in 5 jobs now held by foreign workers...
- American tech employees forced to train immigrants hired to replace them...
"2) No un-earned wealth and power, eg inheritance and hereditary titles"
Sorry, but if I earn and save and invest to accumulate wealth, it is mine to pass along to whoever I see fit - my family, my community, the Save The Friggin' Cats Foundation,... You want a government to confiscate and redistribute for the sake of some arbitrary fairness abstraction. If I earned it lawfully, it is mine to keep and pass on.
"3) A uniform schools system with no private schools"
Here, again, you just want the same big government mugging we are here to discuss getting out from under. Perhaps you are lost?
In a cohesive society where everyone is self sufficient and looking after themselves all it takes is one person to become a banker and very soon he will have everyone else's wealth, property and assets.
A larger group can, with no hard work, seize the assets of smaller groups through force.
It is a nice idea but ignores human nature.
In Europe we have already been through this and it leads to one individual at the top, an absolute monarch, who maintains his position through power, force and wealth.
Governments were actually conceived as a way for the people to have some control of power and their nation.
The good idea has been corrupted by the elites who now own the politicians.
But democracy does offer ways around this and new parties are springing up across Europe who are not under elite control.
The first to come to power being Syriza in Greece.
Sorry, but your theory is nonsense. In a world where everyone is independent and self sufficient, the one banker will starve to death, because no one will need his "services", nor would they need other people's property. Bankers require a desperate population with no ability to self sustain. That's why they create financial collapses, to drive more and more people into desperation, and out of independent living. Human nature tends towards freedom, which is why there have been revolutions through history even in the most controlled societies. No matter what the elites do, they can't seem to oppress the human spirit.
The one person at the top can be knocked off just like anyone else, and that is the secret weakness of oligarchy. Real power elites want to be gods, but they also want anonymity because they are cowards. They can't have both. Eventually, they will reveal themselves out of hubris. The citizenry can then play a game of whack-a-mole, they just have to have the guts to do so, and they will, eventually.
Also, Syriza is a puppet just like all the other EU leaders. He's doing exactly what he is supposed to be doing. Never put your faith in political icons, only have faith in your own ability to take your own actions against tyrants.
Sorry, but your theory is nonsense. In a world where everyone is independent and self sufficient, the one banker will starve to death, because no one will need his "services", nor would they need other people's property.
Not to mention, the banker would be shot by honest individuals within weeks for his evil attempts to defaud others.
And indeed, what people need to protect themselves is no more simple than "self-defense". Someone comes after you or your family or friends or stuff, and they no longer exists.
Pulling weeds works.
-----
What human predators need are... FOOLS.
Americans have no history to learn from.
Even American history can show how the self-sufficient Red Indians were deposed by the new invaders.
Ann took the words from me. Worry about a banker arising in a newly minted independent society is like worrying about someone in that society being a murder or thief. You shoot this person. That is what we should have been doing from the beginning with our evil overlords some 100 yearzs or so ago [I don't know why I picked 100 years, but you know what I mean].
Good luck with building your iPhone factory.
Even American history can show how the self-sufficient Red Indians were deposed by the new invaders.
"Human nature tends towards freedom..."
That is the failed assumption in your logic, and that of many.
Human nature tends toward security and surival first and foremost. Absolutely everything else comes from that. Those who are most sophisticated in manipulating that are currently at the top of the food chain, and have been for some time.
Bankers require a desperate population with no ability to self sustain.
Oh, geez, will you take your hyperbolic fanstay elsewhere? From Shakespeare's time, bankers provided working capital to entrepeneurs with dreams bigger than their pocketbooks. (cf The Merchant of Venice) Bankers provided a convenient conduit for savers to channel to their capital to risk-takers.
Now, were there then, and are there now corrupt bankers? Of course. There were also corrupt railway owners then and now (cf Lac Megantic disaster). There are corrupt manufacturers, corrupt sales organizations, corrupt religious leaders, and even corrupt charities. Archimedes discovered his famous principle because of a corrupt crown-maker. Do you see the pattern? Corruption is a human quality much prized by those who don't want to sing for their supper.
Is it possible that there is more corruption in the banking and finance systems than in other areas of endeavour? Common sense says "Yes", based on Willie Sutton's sage observation "That's where the money is.". George Bailey may be a man of fiction, but I don't doubt the US at one point had hundreds of small-town bankers, the vast majority of which were honest, decent men trying to help fellow citizens build houses, start businesses, etc. whilst safeguarding the assets of depositors.
Today, we have a rapacious banking sector based on three huge mistakes: creation of the Fed, no campaign finance law, and the 19th Amendment. Together, these have combined to give us a "heads we win, tails you lose" banking system, where profits result in huge bonuses for bankers, and losses are handed to the public.
only 1 thing to remember:
"FUCK JEB BUSH!"
Here here. Hard to believe that fucker calls himself a republican. He sounds just like every lying sack of shit democrat. No wonder people can't tell the difference between the party's.
God bless Barbara bush for telling like its is. "We don't need another Bush as president."
Especially that phony fuck.
Fuck Jeb with Barry's Dick!
"Barry's Dick"
Would that be The Wookie of the Year?
People can't tell the difference between the parties (not party's) because there is none.
We currently have a one party system with two branches. The one party system is the money that backs the two branches. These two branches diverge on hot button issues. Issues that in the grand scheme don't mean anything to the moneyed interests but serve to keep the people divided.
CFR- Campaign Finance Reform is our only hope. Remove money and then perhaps we can have an honest discussion about where the country needs to head. As long as money funds both then what divides us will be the focus and we will not stop the decline and the moneyed interests will continue to steal our wealth.
Quote "CFR- Campaign Finance Reform is our only hope. Remove money and then perhaps we can have an honest discussion about where the country needs to head. As long as money funds both then what divides us will be the focus and we will not stop the decline and the moneyed interests will continue to steal our wealth." Unquote
Just how do you think that will ever happen? Will we be wishing the very people who have ruined America are going to fix it by constraining themselves? Any politician that want the job should automatically be disqualified from it. Perhaps we need to institute the "Jury Duty" method of selecting representatives and leaders.
Govt:Sorry sir, but you have President duty for a year.
Citizen:Crap, wonder if I can get out of it.
Again, not going to happen. Have a beer and be ready to fight when the time comes....
Ephesians 6-12
12For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. 13Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. 14Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; 15And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; 16Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. 17And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
What a yummy article. The afterglow.... Ahhh....
Let’s hope Greece saves us.
Yes. "Fear Of Risk Leads To Inaction".
ever feel like there is 7,000 years of history around all of this, bankers, wealthy rulers, contracts, slavery, money, fiat, debt & credit,... revolution, corruption, the fall of kingdoms, cities, empires like Rome due to the same old problems... Except all this info was omitted from our European History and history of the world?
We can go back and see Laws carved in stone in Mesopotamia, 5,000 years ago, which resemble our financial culture & economy.
- Debt & the cost of success, the cost of living, the cost of family, the shame of failure... preclude whistleblowing and activism and free speech, plus what you say is forever saved in email, video, or the internet
- Got a big mouth, lose your job
- need a job, most of us work for corporations with multiple links to other corporations or executives or cronies of some kind, bank records will be held against you
Like prison rape. We’re screwed. Just let it happen.
The problem is the Human Leaders believe in big Intrusive Power and a Military Republic that protects big business schemes (War is a Racket). These facts are in conflict with Freedom, Liberty, Fraternity, Equality, and Justice for All.
- Freedom, Liberty, Equality, and Justice for All.
- With Liberty and Justice For All
- Liberty, Fraternity, Equality
- All Men are Created Equal
- the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them
- unalienable rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
- governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed
- whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it
- in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness
- that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed
The Kings of the USA, the FED, and Wall Street and our legion of Lawyers & Lobbyist have a history of repeated injury to Main Street & other Countries, Democracies and Sovereigns... and to our US Constitution.
The problem is the Human Leaders believe in big Intrusive Power and a Military Republic that protects big business schemes (War is a Racket). These facts are in conflict with Freedom, Liberty, Fraternity, Equality, and Justice for All.
In fact as we all know the "State of Justice" clearly has fallen, various dates can be argued. But I ask when did we become a Military Republic??
I'll attempt nothing coherent, but just mention a couple thoughts that reading this brought to mind.
-----
In past times, the "solution" to tyranny was...
THE FRONTIER
In other words, until rather recently, historically speaking, there were lots of places on this planet that were far enough away that nobody would bother you or your family if you moved there and lived your life.
And so, that's what individualists and liberty-lovers did before. Very practical. Very little history written by or about people who moved into the boonies and lived their own individual lives. They lived their lives, then died. End of story. Very individualistic, but not much in the way of record or guides to read.
Yet... I know some people move to the boonies and live fairly well even today. Yes, me too, but I am very high-tech, a private pilot, and had about $400K saved up to create my digs, so I'm not a very good (in the sense of easily repeatable) example.
Nonetheless, one reason why the problem today is much more urgent is... because you have to go a long way, and to quite a bit of trouble, to "get the hell outta dodge" and vanish into the dwindling "frontier".
-----
For individualists, I've got to assume the best teacher is example. Obviously that contradicts my own behavior, since I value my privacy very greatly and don't open up my place for inspection or for articles with photo-spreads to be published. But not everyone is as radically private as me, and not everyone has much reason to be. So, the thought that comes to mind for those who wish to promote alternatives to authoritarianism is... actually take the time to implemented any aspects you can, then let them be known. In other words, just provide examples. Sometimes all an individualist needs is one more inspiration. One more bit of evidence taking risk is practical, and has a good chance of success if they remain diligent.
-----
I'm about as rabid an individualist as can be. I'd love to have Mars to myself... I'd be in paradise with a whole planet to myself, even if I never saw or communicated with another human being my whole life.
BUT, at the same time, collaboration of individualists with common interests can be powerful. Very powerful. And organizers for destructive causes know this very well, though their kinds of organizations are not what I'm talking about. And for what individualists need (more and better examples), collaborations of 2 to 12 people are more than sufficient.
Twice I've been asked to help people form collaborations to create tiny self-sufficient nano-communities in rural areas, since I did that myself, all for myself. And twice I tried, and twice it fizzled for completely irrelevant reasons.
While this hasn't worked out for me, I can see how a small (and I mean only 2 to 8 individuals, couples or families) gain enormous efficiencies by establishing a tiny self-sufficient communities with [some/variable/optional/voluntary] shared infrastructure. Truth be told, just a couple like-minded folks nearby can be very helpful, especially if you move to a country where few if any of you start out speaking the native language.
The efficiency of even super-small-scale collaboration is enormous! Which is what makes the notion so alluring. However, having said this, and pointed to this as an area with great potential, I must say, I am very glad I didn't wait to build my place in the boonies until I could form a collaboration... because I'd probably still be living in dodge, and trying to form a collaboration.
So, this one is a double-edge sword. Having said all this, I will say, I am at the extreme end of the "social" scale (meaning, not social), so I know many others would have much better luck. In fact, some people seem naturally very good as this. For people like me, probably we're better at just finishing our projects, then moving on.
Don't be so coy Ann. You have indeed shared an example from your uninspected and secreted place. The lesson to be gained from it - get $400,000, buy an airplane, escape to isolation, log onto political websites and declare "humankind is fucked" on repeat.
I understand now why folks like this aren't written into the history books. They're, technically speaking, not a part of human history.
And there perhaps you make THE key observation.
-----
Maybe that's the whole point of calling those few of us "individualists". Maybe none of us should have ever considered ourselves "part of human history" in any way shape or form.
That idea is, in fact, a key factor in my success. Somewhere between age 4 and 8, as a mental device, I chose to consider myself "an alien from outer space, observing earth and humans from far above"... not as "one of them" (humans). I can see now (and even then) that this attitude is key and crucial in our decision making processes.
Maybe the biggest mistake of the "liberty movement" is to adopt the basic notion of all other movements. That is, "our way is for everyone". Now, you don't need to lecture me about the fact that "liberty is different, because we leave everyone free to choose their own way". I know that. I'm not talking about content, I'm talking about approach.
Seems like the "liberty movement" by implication wants to be part of mankind, part of society, and part of human history.
Maybe that's the mistake.
Maybe the whole point of the "liberty movement" should be to ESCAPE mankind, to PART WAYS with mankind, to REMOVE themselves from human history.
After millennia of examples that most humans will support predators, and inherently predatory systems... should individualists and liberty-lovers not GET THE CLUE?
They are NOT part of humanity. They are NOT part of human history.
They are those who escape that pitiful status of willing slave.
Never to be heard from again (they should hope).
-----
Sounds right to me. Definitely fits my lifelong attitude. I've sure never identified with human beings in general (only with a few specific individuals who also "don't fit in and don't want to").
The liberty movement needs to become an "escape movement", not just one of many "social movements". Liberty types will never persuade many humans to join them, and will never be left alone to practice living independent lives within society. So why attempt to make the impossible possible. The impossible is not possible.
So gather your fellow liberty advocates and make escape plans.
Say WE QUIT... then leave.
And yes, as someone said nearby, take any limited good examples you can find from other fringe attempts like Amish. There is nothing anti-individualist or anti-liberty about voluntary cooperation and collaboration. And a little collaboration can be very efficient. Run the numbers and you'll see that. But always keep it small-scale and simple. Always remember the KISS principle.
+1000. Im with you. As for me, the older I get, the less I like people.
Look to the Amish/Mennonites. See my post a few posts down. They have a proven effective model that has worked for centuries and avoided or mitigated so much of the world's insanity. They deal in real, tangible things like agriculture or construction and don't deal in imaginary things like banking, lawyers, or politicing. They are essentially self-sufficient. They are the ideal model that I've seen so far. Anyone have a better, proven, model?
What didn't You Know. It is against American National Security and Interests (bankers) to tell the Truth. This is Economic War, collateral damage is the Middle Class who will pay for it but it is better than Dying which will be the last card the Fed can force on us, going into Physical Battle. Wrap the flag around yourself, be pround in BananAmerica, The Dictoral State that is Aggresors against All Mankind.
"The truth does not require fans; it functions fine without them."
The problem with government and their union sycophants in a sentence.
Start meditating on the truth and question everything.
Stop consuming other people's opinions.
Likeminded people will unite.
I think Claustwitz got it exactly backwards. Politics is war by other means. Always carried out under a patina of some sort of made-up "legitimacy," politics is what homo sapiens engage in to loot their fellows, short of clubbing each other over the head.
Government being, at best, a neccesary evil, decent people engage in politics as little as possible, even under a nice-sounding guise like the so-called "liberty movement." And we engage in it, always with a view to one thing, keeping the politicos -- who are invariably drawn from the scum of the earth -- in their boxes.
Otherwise, there are much more important things in life to focus on, like family, spirituality, career, culture, walking the dog, etc., etc., etc.
A rifle behind every blade of grass don't need no organization (or organizers).
American history shows how the self-sufficient Red Indians were deposed by the new invaders.
Little self-sufficient communities are sitting ducks to those with wealth and power and the ability to oragnise an army.
The point is you won't lead an army, but you can be a leader in your household, neighborhood, community, etc.
And Indians turning on eachother was a main issue with their demise.
That's what you might do but what is everyone else going to do?
The psychopathic leaders don't just disappear, they will be looking to get back what they had before.
The idea is a youthful fantasy.
"And Indians turning on each other was a main issue with their demise."
Is that what they teach in US schools?
Accused of pushing a youthful fantasy by someone named Batman11, funny dose of irony. Right there is always a power struggle that will perpetuate throughout human existance. You propose do nothing because you focus on defeats.
Superhero online, pansy in life. Not so funny irony.
Pansy - sticks and stones ......
Try looking at European history (we have some).
There will always be aggressive types looking to take by force, bankers looking to take by stealth.
By force the absolute monarch came into being.
Government came into being to give control to the people.
Elites have taken over established parties but in Europe new parties are springing up to give people hope.
The French had their revolution centuries ago.
A country with no history (the US) has strange idea about becoming survivalists and living in muddy holes in Montana.
Great till a psychopath and his army find you.
Not sticks and stones, your responses are from a frame of view that is soft, like a flower. And yes your broad overview of European history is accurate and well known.
Yet trying to support your perceived superiority you slide into petulance with sticks and stones: a country with no history(the US).
too much howard zinn.
american history shows that criminals running criminal organizations - Lincoln and the federal guv and their bankster backers - created the methods of total war and used these against their own kind (white people) first. This was then applied against the Plains Indians by the same fascist combine of guv and banksters.
So... what I am hearing in this article, is that the sycophants of Saul Alinski political theory are the heirs of Thrasymachus, and that those in the liberty movement should follow the Confucius example.
Thrasymachus if you recall from Plato's Republic, advocated that the elite claim to be just, when in fact they are the opposite of just. Confucius said he was a teacher... nothing more.
The author also says the liberty movement should be a complex system, ala complexity theory. (Not in so many words however).
I am not disagreeing, but I ask, Elitist theory states that a well organized small group will overcome a disorganized larger one every time. This maxim has been proven over and over... 10% of Germans were Nazis, but the Nazis gained total control of Germany.
So my question becomes, how does a complex group, out organize the well organized new class progressives?
thank Lincoln
fed rights vs states rights
this is NOT what the Fouding Fathers envisioned
back to the VISION...
now do you think the 47% parasites want or can handle PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY OR PERSONAL FREEDOM...
the buy a vote regime..... just watch .... more for defense in return for more for socialism.... both on the national debit card.....bigger govt... fuck the future, live for today. there are few politicians worthy to lick the boots of the founders...
Go back a ways. Have you ever heard of the Montana Freemen? Thought not. In '96, the feds (Clinton, Reno, Freeh & probably Lon Horiuchi) had infiltrated/promoted the militias and went to do a Waco job on these ranchers. The Fed-sponsored militia (those who could get "air" time) said to stay away, it wasn't a Waco.
They lied! BTW, these ranchers from Montana where the Sovereign Law is the Law according to Statute when statutes don't apply had taken the Fed Reserve on at their own game, recorded and perfected judgment liens from their Justus Township traded as commercial paper even the IRS could not refuse. Skurdal knew his history, Constitution and the law and they competed with the illegal Fed reserve, only lawfully.
What came out of nowhere was a small group of dedicated, armed individuals who - by some Spirit of Creation - were lead to the right places to be there at the right time to thwart Waco II. Surprise, surprise, surprise!
Heavily and sophisticatedly armed, dangerous and quickly followed by 1000s of other small groups of dedicated, armed dangerous folks both in Montana and in States across the Nation promising to kill every fed in Montana and to start taking down political officials and anyone trying to protect said officials across the Nation if one Freemen died joined and momentum soared. Pulled some air time as curiosities on a local radio station - which the feds heard and even pulled some major network time which got twisted. Were followed by night-stalking choppers, scoped by snipers like sitting ducks in the middle of a ranch on the Musselshell river basin, infiltrated and still carried the day.
That and the Internet have bought you folks almost 20 years of slightly less than the Blood Games that were planned. FEMA camps are now DHS. Thinking back, it is often wondered by said individuals why they didn't push the button and go for it. Answer, the sleeping Giant that is the USA was still asleep and didn't hear that last snooze alarm.
Yes, they went back to the drawing board, tweaked the machine and are still relentlessly pursuing your demise including your incorporation into global governance. But at least, FINALLY, this conversation is not about a pot-bellied hilljack who wants to be POTUS.
But it was that pot-bellied hilljack and a few buds that kept you from the incinerators off of Lodge road just NE of Antrim, Ohio (NE of Cambridge).
And, unfortunately, rust doesn't sleep. But what is it that is said:
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead
The Mennonite / Amish Model.
Perhaps the best model, which has been historically effective, can be seen in the Amish/Mennonite communities across America and the world. They interact minimally with government and keep to themselves. They refuse to "serve" in wars or engage in blind nationalism.
One of the key aspects of their culture and beliefs are to be as self sufficient as possible and minimize dependency on others outside their community. They are not bankers, or laywers, or politicians. They produce real, tangible things that are often the necessities of life. If they do get loans, they are often from friends and family. The vast majority are directly involved in agriculture or construction of homes, barns, water wells, silos, storage, warehouses, etc.
They take care of their own extremely well and even help others in need, thus improving their relations with those not part of their community. Most of them are self-employed or work coopertively with those in their community. They do not "go at it alone" and instead emphasize cooperative efforts rather than self-centered pursuits. They are typically neutral on political issues, don't vote, and are neither enemies nor allies of anyone. Essentially they mind their own business and don't meddle in other's business either.
This model has been working quite well for these people for several centuries and in numerous countries. I think this model, though perhaps not identically copied, would benefit people who are inclined to break away from the insane and deteriorating world around us. What needs to be stated about this sucessful model is that the glue that binds them is their very strong faith in a higher power and following the rules they believe that higher power gave them. I do not believe their communities or culture would be as strong has been without a unifying core belief, namely their faith.
If there is a better, proven model, that is equal to, or better, than this model of mitigating the effects of an insane world, I would like to hear about it. I currently work with and live near a large Mennonite community and I'm learning everything I can from them.