Year: 2008

Another one from the thread that just won’t die:

When I was in West Germany,  during My active duty. I had a chance to talk to many of the Older German citizens, at the gast houses.  Many of these wise Old man spoke of the early 30’s etc. And how horrified they were to see what was being done to some people by the Gestapo.  But their Loyalty to their government stopped them,  from speaking out against the abuses.  Even though it put utter shivers down their spine and many said it Infuriated them. To see people( Their own neighbors in some instances/Very good friends) being arrested and taken away without due process of law.  But it happens everyday in America Now!  Not in such a gross context as Germany was then. But it is getting there.  And it will continue too! Because abuse by government does not get the proper scrutiny by the People, it deserves.  Or held to account for such abuses, by Law.

Get that?  Every day in America the Gestapo head out to snatch up political undesirables, and the Olofson case is proof of it!  Olofson, on whom the government served a lawfully obtained search warrant, gathered evidence against, permitted the assistance of counsel, and tried by a jury of his peers.  Yet this apparently means we’re precariously close to 1930s Germany.  It’s a shame you can’t order a sense of perspective on Amazon.

I have said before that I am no fan of the tactics the ATF used to convict Olofson, and I am certainly no fan of the laws that he was convicted of violating.  If the jury had walked him, I would have considered that justice done.  That a man like Olofson, who harmed no one, is rotting in a federal prison right now is exactly why these laws are wrong.

But because I advocate reigning in the ATF through legislation rather than gunfire, I am not an ally, but an enemy.  Because I propose we ought to repeal, or at the very least reform the regulations on automatic weapons in this country, rather than shooting any federal bastard who gets tasked with enforcing them, I am a coward, and sullying the cause.

Any “revolution” prosecuted by folks like this will not be one I will join.  Call me a coward, call me what you will, but I don’t see any good place it can possibly go.  An anonymous commenter made a very cogent point:

The point of revolt should be to win. And you won’t win… you CAN’T win, unless you have won the hearts and minds of a significant amount of We the People. This is, after all, your goal… right? The restoration of the Republic? Do you propose to “impose liberty” on a majority who don’t agree with your definition? Sounds more Che Guevara than George Washington to me.

“Leave me alone or I’m going to shoot” isn’t an argument. It’s a threat. It doesn’t win converts to your side, because it ultimately doesn’t offer any answers. If we’re to take you seriously, that you believe a Revolution can and will happen, then you should be able to answer this question: what would your post-Revolution society be like? If you can’t articulate a vision for this country other than “leave me alone”, then you’re not a believer in Locke (who saw a need for government), you’re just a garden variety anarchist.

The restoration of a constitutional republic isn’t going to happen when the same people who elected the government before the revolution will be electing it after.  After and during the first American revolution, things were made quite uncomfortable for loyalists.  By uncomfortable, I mean more than a few of them were dragged out of their homes, tarred, feathered, hung in some cases, shot in others.  Some of them were merely disarmed.  About ten to fifteen percent of loyalists emigrated.  In today’s terms, that would be about 45 million refugees.  Where are they all going to go?  Are we going to pass laws denying them citizenship?  Are we going to take their property?  If the answer is no, then the same people will elect another government that will look a lot like this one.  If the answer is yes, then you can count me out of that nonsense unless there’s absolutely, positively no other choice.  Revolution is nasty business.  It should not be undertaken or threatened lightly.  Many of these people do not speak like people who really, truly think that violence is an absolute last resort.

Kim du Toit brings up a lot of important points in regards to the thread yesterday:

I’ve lived in a state of near-revolution, and let me tell you, it wasn’t pretty. Want to go and visit your mother in the next town over? Imagine having to call ahead to the local police stations or military bases to see if the road is safe to travel on. (Add IEDs to this, and I think the picture becomes even clearer.) Has the Kmart been swept recently for explosive devices? Is anyone lurking over the road, waiting to shoot you when you come out to mow your lawn?

I think Kim’s clarity on this issue comes from the fact that he’s an immigrant, and has been much closer to actual civil unrest than any of us have been.  I would also imagine that people who grew up in a different culture also aren’t raised with all the American cultural myths.  Now, I’m not going to immediately bash on mythology.  Every society needs its mythology in order to define itself as a people.  But I think we do need to recognize when mythology starts getting its nose into the tent of reality.

One particular American myth is that of the clean revolution.  No one disputes that the American Revolution was just and necessary, but history tends to white wash the nastier bits.  One doesn’t have to look much farther than what happened to Loyalists both during and after the revolution to realize that it wasn’t clean. As Peter at Firearms and Freedom point out, even if you win your revolution, you’re still stuck with the same population that voted the original government into existence.  None of the ways to deal with that problem are pretty.

Our revolution was also risky.  The founding fathers, who pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, would have certainly been executed if the revolution had been put down, but they also would have been in trouble had they lost control.  If it wasn’t for George Washington, we would be a backwater, just like many of the other American colonies.  History is not replete with men who willingly surrender great power.  Washington may not have filled the intellectual role in our nation’s founding that Jefferson or Madison did, and he might not have been the greatest general the world has ever seen, but Washington made his place in our history with these words:

Having now finished the work assigned me, I retire from the great theatre of Action; and bidding an Affectionate farewell to this August body under whose orders I have so long acted, I here offer my Commission, and take my leave of all the employments of public life.

That is, in my opinion, one of the greatest acts in the history of mankind.  Not only for what it said of Washington’s character, but because men like Washington are so utterly rare in history.

For the people today who think about affecting a clean revolution, remember that your revolution will not change the people of the United States, who elected the government that you so despise, and we’d be extraordinarily lucky to be lead by another Washington.  The only clean revolutions are those that happen by the ballot box.

That’s why Bitter is pissed off about this whole thread, since she’s worked most of her adult life on affecting a truly clean revolution on this issue by convincing her fellow citizens to toss out the bums who vote for gun control.  It’s also why I love people like Breda, who bring in passion for the issue, and are eagar to share it with others.  If we had a thousand Bitters and Bredas scattered around the country, gun rights would be an unstoppable juggernaut.  We’d get our clean revolution.  This is where I make my contribution in the here and now.  What about you?