In my article 'Trump Impeachment And The Civil War Scenario', I warned that conservatives and leftists are being pushed to the brink of a shooting war using various methods of social manipulation and 4th Gen warfare, and that this conflict, if dictated by gatekeepers of the false Left/Right paradigm, would only benefit establishment elites in the long run. Internal division among the public is designed to keep us at each other's throats while losing focus on the real enemies.
Hard line democrats and the social justice cult are merely a symptom of the disease, they are not the source of the disease. However, I also acknowledge that the rift between conservatives and the political left has become so extreme that reconciliation is almost impossible. War might be unavoidable, and the globalists love it. If they can pretend like they had nothing to do with creating tensions, and if conservatives are so blinded by anger against Democrats that they refuse to admit that some of their own political leaders (including Trump) have been co-opted, the elites win.
The danger in any civil war is that BOTH sides end up being manipulated and controlled, and that the situation is maneuvered towards an outcome that only serves the interests of a select few.
Virginia may be a test bed, a trial run for a nationwide conflagration, and if it does hit a point where state officials compel a violent response from the citizenry, then it is important that liberty advocates remain vigilant and steer clear of incompetent or controlled leaders. It is also important that they remember there is a much larger agenda at play here; the Democrats may be useful idiots fueling that agenda, but most of them are oblivious to their role. Our fight is not with the Democrats, our fight is with the globalists that influence them; the same globalists that are trying to influence us.
First and foremost we have to address the propaganda, because all wars begin first in the public consciousness. The current situation in Virginia remains a battle of political rhetoric and “fluid” interpretations of the law. Here are the arguments I've seen from the political left so far on the issue of 2nd Amendment Sanctuaries:
Leftists argue that sanctuary county resolutions are “purely symbolic” and have no force of law behind them.
This is a rather naive (perhaps deliberately naive) position, as it ignores the fundamentals. The force of law is either compelled by conscience, or it is compelled by violence. The law itself is meaningless without these two factors. If groups of citizens choose not to follow a law because they find it morally reprehensible, there is nothing the state can do except try to frighten them into compliance with the threat of violence. The concept of a law by itself has no energy, and claiming that something is “right” because it is now “law” is not a valid argument.
In the case of anti-gun laws in Virginia, the VAST majority of counties in the state and the people in those counties have made it clear that they will not comply. The leftists have completely ignored this fact by simply saying “They have to comply because the law says so...” This is the type of attitude that leads to war.
Leftists argue that state laws supersede county authority and there is no legal standing for sanctuary resolutions.
The problem with this argument is that it ignores the fact that constitutional protections provided by the Bill of Rights supersede ALL other laws. It does not matter if attempts are being made by state governments or the federal government to degrade constitutional rights, the people are empowered to refuse and fight against ANY laws which violate constitutional rights.
For example, Democrats often bring up the history of Jim Crow Laws as a rationale for Federal intervention in the legal affairs of states. Jim Crow laws were segregation laws passed by state governments, and in many cases there was resistance on a public level to these laws. Democrats like to cite Jim Crow laws whenever conservatives argue for states rights and 10th Amendment nullification of unconstitutional federal laws. They have conveniently memory-holed the issue whenever state laws are working in favor of their agenda.
The bottom line is this: The constitution and Bill of Rights take precedence over all other laws in the US, and if Democrats are going to use legal technicality as their foundation for draconian gun control measures, then they really have no leg to stand on. If their argument is that citizens and counties have no legal right to nullify state laws no matter how immoral or unconstitutional, then what would they say if a state government brought back Jim Crow, or legalized slavery? Virginia's gun control efforts are no different.
Leftists assert that new laws in Virginia are “standard” because similar laws have been passed in other states.
This is the totalitarian tip-toe at work. Once an unconstitutional law is passed in California, New York or Illinois, this therefore means that the laws have become “standard” and are thus acceptable.
An unconstitutional law is an unconstitutional law. It does not matter how many states pass such a law and proclaim it normal or standard. The people of Virginia have announced en masse that they have no intention of following new gun control laws. The people have spoken, over 90% of counties in Virginia have passed 2nd Amendment resolutions with the support of the citizenry. Democrats gaining seats in an election does not give them the power to deny constitutional rights to Virginians.
Beyond this, the Virginia laws are nowhere near standard. Clearly, Virginia is being used as a testing ground for Red Flag laws in particular, which are the most concerning. Red Flag laws allow gun confiscation without due process based on ambiguous accusations backed often by zero evidence; it is prosecution and punishment without representation or defense. Red Flag gun laws are a means by which the state can violate your rights while circumventing due process.
(I will make note here that leftists aren't the only people that are pushing for Red Flag laws. Donald Trump is a vocal supporter of them as well)
The numerous laws Virginia's government hopes to implement set the stage for the incremental removal of all gun rights. Currently, at least four of these laws have been advanced by the Virginia Senate Judiciary committee and many more are expected to be implemented by the end of this month.
They are pushing the envelope to see how far they can move the boundary of what is “standard” when it comes to anti-gun laws. The people of Virginia know this is the agenda. It has ALWAYS been the leftist agenda (not to mention a globalist agenda) to seek out total disarmament of the population while claiming they only want "reasonable safeguards". This is unacceptable, and will not be tolerated.
Leftists argue that law enforcement authorities that refuse to enforce new gun laws risk losing their “official immunity”.
I'm not sure that “official immunity” has anything to do with the enforcement of gun laws; it is meant to protect LEOs from civil litigation while conducting normal ministerial duties. This sounds more like a thinly veiled threat against county officials and law enforcement who refuse to comply. It is also an empty threat.
County officials cannot be compelled by the state to actively enforce unconstitutional gun control laws, nor can the state force a county to set aside funds for such an effort. In the case of county sheriffs, these are officials elected by the people of the county, and they answer to those people first, and state government second. County officials can be punished for breaking the law, but they cannot be punished for not enforcing the law to an arbitrary degree that the state sees as acceptable.
Leftists are pursuing other more aggressive avenues to enforce new gun laws.
Representatives of the state government have threatened the possible use of the national guard to force counties to comply. They have made a budget proposal for $6.5 million to form a new "sex offense and firearms investigation unit”, which they deny will be used as a goon squad to enter into sanctuary counties and enforce new gun laws by circumventing local law enforcement, much like the federal government uses the FBI or ATF to circumvent state authorities when it pleases them.
Finally, the Virginia government is also seeking at least $250,000 to be allocated to prisons, and this is directly tied to the new gun laws and the people that will be imprisoned by them.
The governor of Virginia claims that he supports grandfathering in existing guns as long as they are registered in the new state database. Of course, gun owners know from history that the first step towards total confiscation is forced registration. The mainstream media has suggested that anyone who thinks these budget changes are in preparation for arresting gun owners is a "conspiracy theorist".
They had better be right, because the government of Virginia should know that if they did compel such actions it would be a detrimental mistake.
The national guard of Virginia is made up of the citizens of Virginia, and many of these people may not comply either. If they do, or if the state establishes an enforcement arm to target individual citizens to make examples out of them, the most likely outcome is that people will defend themselves and their constitutional rights. People on both sides might be hurt in the process.
The question then arises: Are these laws worth dying for? I can say with some authority as a long time activist in the liberty movement that the majority of conservatives are willing to risk death to protect their rights. Are state authorities willing to risk death to enforce unconstitutional laws? Because that is where this situation is headed...
Leftists claim that 2nd Amendment sanctuaries are not comparable to illegal immigrant sanctuaries.
Leftists are correct, the two situations are NOT the same. Illegal immigration is not a constitutionally protected right, and gun ownership is.
I find it fascinating that not long ago leftists and statist Republicans were arguing fervently against the idea that states and municipalities could nullify federal law. During the 10th Amendment and nullification uprisings that led to such confrontations as Bundy Ranch, these people viciously attacked anyone that supported sovereignty activism. They used to claim that the federal government was the alpha and the omega; the final word. Now, suddenly, leftists have pulled a u-turn and are attempting to assert sovereignty rights for illegals in sanctuary states and cities. Again, illegals are not afforded constitutional protections, gun owners are.
One could try to make a moral argument in favor of protecting illegal immigrants from deportation, but there is no legal argument. And, I could easily present a far superior moral argument against illegal immigration than they ever could in favor of it. I would have to write a whole other article to cover this issue in depth, but it is important to point out the double standards and hypocrisy inherent in the leftist position.
Leftists argue that this is only about Virginia.
Conservatives don't see it that way. A conflict in Virginia will likely attract thousands of people from outside the state, because the view will be that the line is being drawn there. It may also spread beyond Virginia into other states with unconstitutional gun control measures.
Now, it's important for conservatives, especially those that actually live in Virginia, to understand that there will be conmen and shysters who will show up out of nowhere and try to exploit the situation to elevate their own careers or public image. They will try to make as much money as they can while shamelessly self promoting. They will pretend to help while offering substandard advice and substandard training. And if the manure hits the fan, these guys will suddenly disappear as quickly as they arrived.
There will also be people who will try to steer the conflict towards a left vs right paradigm, as I noted earlier. Sanctuary counties should maintain local leadership and local representation in these matters to avoid being manipulated. If people outside the state want to help, then they should be fine with doing this under the supervision and management of the locals.
The best possible scenario would be that the state government of Virginia realizes that it's not worth it to try to enforce unconstitutional gun laws, and that the risks are far too high to manage. They would abandon such endeavors and recognize that counties will not comply even if they try to apply leverage to them.
My suspicion is that the state will try to enforce laws quietly and incrementally at first, arresting a handful of violators and activists over the course of several months to make examples out of them while test running Red Flag laws for backdoor confiscation. They will wait for the activists to quiet down and go home.
The worst case scenario is that this is an establishment beta test for the rest of the country, and that they may WANT to start a conflict in the hopes that this will spread into a national civil war. This kind of scheme would require accelerated and violent enforcement of gun laws by Democrats in Virginia to illicit an immediate response. If this is the case, and a wider conflict is triggered, conservatives MUST NOT lose sight of the bigger picture. The globalists should be the focus of our ire; the democrats are being used. A conflict based only on political division will mean defeat for us all, and a win for the elites.
* * *
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch. Learn more about it HERE.