Print this post Print this post

Beltway Rambos

dopes1,488 words

German translation here

Are conservatives going to start shooting people?

The Beltway Right is defending so-called “assault weapons” because they are the final check on government repression. After Alex Jones’s typically bombastic performance on Piers Morgan, contributor and controlled opposition Ben Shapiro appeared to play the “reasonable conservative” across from the C-list celebrity hacker. He argued that the American people need AR-15s because they provide a concrete way to resist the state. Piers Morgan was of course indignant, arguing that the military could easily kill any Americans that dared oppose them.

Let’s leave aside the obvious conclusion that the likes of Piers Morgan are fantasizing about the military mowing down conservatives. We already know that progressivism has grown to love the police state. What is more interesting is even the simpering castrati of the Beltway have taken a break from denouncing the “black genocide” of abortion, condemning Nazis like Chuck Hagel, and urging more immigration to indulge in their own dreams of righteous violence.

They are, after all, correct—the Second Amendment, is, as they say, not about deer hunting. As America’s military is well into year 11 of the War in Afghanistan against illiterate tribesman armed with antiquated weapons, the likes of Shapiro seem to have a better grasp on the potential of insurgency and guerrilla warfare than Field Marshal Morgan.

That said, even though they’re right, what are conservatives really saying here? Let’s spell it out. Resisting government tyranny with rifles means that Americans will someday shoot the servants of the state when some line is crossed. This means killing police officers, soldiers, security personnel, and, presumably, politicians. Forget euphemism: are conservatives willing to say what they are actually proposing?

Of course, a typical American conservative would protest that he’s not saying we should shoot people now, but at some future point when a line is crossed. Some of my more dedicated libertarian colleagues are fond of saying that “we are at that awkward point where it is too late to work within the system but too early to start shooting the bastards.” Fair enough. Who do we shoot and when? Where is the line?

Is it when the government starts telling you what you can do with your property? Well, we haven’t had that right since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and various additions, court rulings, and regulatory expansions have restricted it further. While the abuse of eminent domain hasn’t quite reached Chinese levels, the Kelo ruling from the Supreme Court gives government the right to confiscate your property for minimal recompense, in order to help the investments of the rich.

How about government taking your children from you? Well, they can do that. It can be because you lost a divorce case. It can be because the government doesn’t like the names you gave them. It can be over your political beliefs. It can be over your religion—assuming they don’t just kill your family in order to “protect” them, like they did at Waco and Ruby Ridge. It can even be just for the hell of it.

How about telling you what you can eat or drink? Well, the government sends armed men to arrest people for drinking raw milk in the land of the free. And don’t you dare try to open a lemonade stand.

Shutting down your business and destroying your livelihood? Well, that happens all the time. It can be because of the “environment.” It can be because of “racism.” It can be because of regulation. It can be because they just don’t like you.

Waging wars of aggression based on faulty information? Well . . . conservatives, at least some of them, tend to like that. But yeah, we do that too.

That’s it! God! People fight in the name of God. Will the dreaded American Religious Right rise in righteous fury against the Babylon on the Potomac that sanctions infanticide, celebrates gay marriage, and wages unrelenting war against Christianity in the public square? Actually, evangelicals are more likely to die for the Beast, though they are despised by their masters. And the main concern of evangelical leaders right now is that America doesn’t have enough Mexicans.

What about freedom of speech? It’s true that the United States still has the First Amendment. While it is used to defend pornography, obscenity, and various other filth, in theory it should actually protect political speech. In this country, it does. You won’t be arrested for saying something politically incorrect. The state will just help your enemies have you fired, threatened, stripped of property, defamed, and physically attacked.

But you won’t be arrested. Definitely not. That only happens in dictatorships like Great Britain, France, or Germany, which presumably American conservatives are willing to overthrow.

Arbitrary taxation? Sending “swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance”? Hounding people to the grave so the government has more money to give to powerful bankers? Yup, yup, yup.

Ah! Discrimination. We can all agree the oppressed should rise up against that. Well, whites are discriminated against in jobs and education. Schools defame them as a group. Minorities and immigrants receive preferential treatment when starting a business, making it difficult to compete. And the real problem the country faces is . . . white privilege.

Well, at least you can vote your way out. Like when Michigan outlawed affirmative action. Oh wait . . . actually the courts threw that out because they said it would hurt minorities. The law is the law, unless a Leftist says it will make blacks feel sad. Then it doesn’t count. So that doesn’t work either. Same with Proposition 187 in California a decade ago. Good thing that immigration never had any bad impacts on California.

Well, there is one thing which definitely serves as the definition of tyranny. If government can seize you, without trial, without charges, without counsel, and then have you killed, that is tyranny.

Oh . . . actually they do that too.

Here’s the problem. You have a country where whites are officially discriminated against by the government and have their earnings savaged by taxes and inflation. They work long hours if they are lucky enough to find a job so they can subsidize people who hate them. They send their kids to schools that teach them they are evil. Meanwhile, other laws are openly ignored so non-white immigrants can displace them from jobs, resources, and political power. If, out of desperation, they join the armed services, they will be sent to die in wars fought for the benefit of someone else. In fact, one of the people they are supposed to be fighting “for” will probably be the one who shoots them. And there’s no way out.

All of this exists today in what used to be our country. Elsewhere in the Western world, it is actually worse. What is more likely—that National Review publishes a call to take up arms or that it pushes a new editorial about how conservatives can win minority voters with talk about the economy?

That said, there is an answer as to when people will finally be ready to start shooting back. People will use their guns against the government . . . when the government comes to take their guns.

Of course, this has it all backwards. The guns are supposed to protect something other than themselves—property, family, liberty, anything. Instead, Americans are only willing to use their guns in order to defend their guns.

The fact is this country is far more repressive, tyrannical, and totalitarian than anything we revolted against the British for. As James Mason points out about His Majesty George III, “This man could have been called a lot of things, but he couldn’t be called evil.” The American government, as a collective entity, is evil. Yet here we are, pretending we are free, defending our revolutionary heritage when all of the critical battles have already been fought and lost. If self-government means anything, we’ve already lost it. If tyranny means anything other than “scary uniforms,” it’s already here.

Conservatives aren’t going to shoot anybody. They soil themselves when someone calls them racist, and we are supposed to believe that they are going to take the “God bless our troops” stickers off their SUVs and start mowing down Marines?

Even though I despise gun-grabbing liberals, let me give them some unsolicited advice. Call conservatives’ bluff.

Let’s have progressives ask conservatives when they think it is right to start killing people. Let’s cut the nonsense. Let’s see what conservatives actually think they are fighting for and what they think is important. My guess is they don’t even know.

Perhaps it is better if they take our guns. At least then the Beltway Right won’t have any more excuses. We’ll be serfs, but at least we’ll be serfs without illusions. Then, maybe, we can do something about it besides bluster.


This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , . Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  1. David
    Posted January 15, 2013 at 5:02 am | Permalink

    Awesome. Epic. And tragically true. All of the talking from “conservatives” is as hollow as the keyboard tough guy who challenges dudes a continent away to fights.

    As the Jewish supremacists close in on final victory of their hated enemy, European Christendom (or white gentiles, if you prefer), I think it helps to clarify that their two biggest weapons were their control of money (from the Fed all the way down to regional investor networks), and their control of the culture via Hollywood and Manhattan. People cannot conceive of reality outside of movies and TV. (For example, I love Jack Donovan’s writing, but listening to him pining over the military it’s clear he thinks that American troops are in the opening of ‘Saving Private Ryan’, rather than thugs gleefully partaking in a one-sided slaughter of peasants where their scant few casualties are actually from when they murder each other.)

    And people have to divorce themselves wholly from the lies of TV, movies, etc.

    It’s a hard thing to express, but it seems clear that an absolute central cause of people’s servility to the government is that they’re emotionally invested into the false worldview that they’ve gotten from TV and the movies. They know subconsciously that it’s bullshit, but they can’t admit it. Until people can confess that their whole worldview is bullshit, than they’ll continue to be all talk. (By “they”, I mean “we”, of course!)

    (Here is another example of the mass delusion Americans have because of TV and movies. Violent crime in America has PLUMMETED in the past 20 years – likely because of suspiciously dropping testosterone levels. And yet in Gallop Poll after Gallop Poll, Americans claim that street crime is going UP and so we need more cops and military. Why do people believe the exact opposite of what is happening in their communities? Because of what they see in TV and movies. The great writer Radley Balko touches on this bizarre phenomenon here:

    I know this sounds like a digression, but it is meant to diagnose the primary cause of the feebleness of Americans.

    • Posted January 16, 2013 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

      About my writing, thanks.

      But, man, you really should talk to some of the guys that have watched the noble peasants rape little boys in broad daylight, and watched the children set the bombs that kill their friends, or been threatened at gunpoint by our hash-smoking “allies.” There are tons of decent guys from decent families who go over there young and come to realize that the US shouldn’t be there, and end up really ambivalent about the US Military itself, but who know they’d be court-martialed for sharing half of what they know with the public. It sounds like you are buying into the leftist media’s conception of the military.

      I’m not saying there aren’t plenty of jerks and dumb thugs in the military. (And there always have been, no doubt. There’s every reason to believe there were a lot of base, assholish medieval knights–basic human nature.) But military men are fairly well muzzled when it comes to what they can really talk about in public. I’m in contact with some guys who are now or have been overseas, and that’s where I try to get my impressions from…not Hollywood…although I’m sure that plays a role, too.

      • David
        Posted January 17, 2013 at 12:59 am | Permalink

        Most of what I get from the military comes from the snuff films on LiveLeak and what-not.

        I don’t know of any leftist media that is critical of the military. To the contrary, their rhetoric of “the troops” is as religious as is the Republicans’. As a small example, I remember something as trivial as the Marines laughingly throwing a puppy over a cliff (another snuff film quickly yanked from YouTube) was relegated to the ghettos of the internet – though killing a dog did get enough press to result in some wrist-slap, as I recall, far worse than murdering a human being.

        Any way that one slices it, the death toll in the Iraq “war” is a TINY fraction of wars of the past, and yet it lasted way longer. This is not even factoring in the cold reality that most of those deaths are from fratricide or from accidents (or from “accidents”).

        None of this is to judge an individual government worker. As you say, it’s common sense that one needs to size up each man on his own terms. But whether it’s left wing or right wing, the shameless idolatry for the military (both the Oscars and the Super Bowl have embarrassing “Support the Troops” moments of silence) is embarrassing and silly. It’s shameless propaganda, in my opinion, meant to celebrate the “wars”. So this is balance that I’m speaking to.

        In my opinion – and this comes from a place as an amateur economist and social theorist – young men, to become useful grown men, must spend their formative years learning trades and skills. Prancing around in government costumes, collecting government checks, and learning to kill third world peasants is not a useful skill.

        Perhaps if every young American wasn’t racing to join the military as they now are, then America wouldn’t be importing all of our useful men from India, Pakistan, and other country where the men have the good sense to value crafts and productivity.

  2. Posted January 15, 2013 at 8:16 am | Permalink

    Back during an earlier GC frenzy, I think Waco, Detroit’s Fifth Estate, America’s longest running anarchist paper — a former hippie rag turned Baudrillard theorist turned anarcho-primitivist — had an excellent piece, basically pro-gun, after all, it was good enough for the Black Panthers! — but pointing out the essential fallacy of the “we need guns to fight the government” line.

    Which is, that revolutions are futile unless and until the police and military go over onto the side of the People; in which case, they hand out the guns themselves. Hence, the problem with Viet Nam or Afghanistan. Air superiority is nice, but it is another fallacy to think that it is everything [the Air Force has been promoting that, of course, since Billy Mitchell’s day]. To hold territory, you need people on the ground. If the local police and military hate you, you’ve got problems.

    The US almost got it right with Iraq, with the much-derided dismissal of all the “Baathist elements” in the police and military. Unfortunately, with no one to replace them [since everyone hates us] the result was chaos.

    The purpose of civilian militias is the reverse, to use civilians to fight along side the army. Hence, Switzerland and Israel. The “Founding Fathers” may have thought otherwise, but then we know they were backwoods colonials who said a lot of stupid things.

    There was a shooting incident last week in Switzerland, likely another psy-ops to attack the “But Switzerland has guns” talking point — but the Swiss just shrugged their shoulders. “We need weapons to defend the homeland” they said. Note, defend the homeland, not “fight the government”. In real democracies the people don’t view the government as alien or dangerous.

    Our crypto-Judaic Constitutionalism [sacred scripture interpreted by Jews in black robes] is the problem. If we were a real democracy, we’d have guns and national health insurance. The whole notion that the government is — i.e., must be — our enemy [“Keep the government’s hands off my Medicare!” as the famous Tea Party moron shouted] is opposed to Spengler/Yockey Prussian Socialism. Just as “The Government is your friend” is the Left’s equally poisonous idea.

    As always, the Jew controls both pseudo-oppositions, thus short-circuiting any movement for change. Notice how Israel has both guns and national health insurance? And no NRA or ACLU?

  3. Josh
    Posted January 15, 2013 at 10:01 am | Permalink

    Awesome! The best thing on CC in a long time.

  4. Posted January 15, 2013 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

    “You won’t be arrested for saying something politically incorrect. The state will just help your enemies have you fired, threatened, stripped of property, defamed, and physically attacked.”

    Returning from court this morning where I finally paid off a substantial fine for knocking the camera out of the hand of a woman who had it stuck 2 inches from my nose. ( the local ” human rights” group had taken out an ad in the local paper to take pictures of the ” Nazis”)

    Today my husband gets home from working in North Dakota. He has a week off and then he has to go back. His many years of experience in the teaching profession are worthless now that the same ” human rights” group has had him blacklisted from working in any of the local schools in his chosen profession. So he drives a forklift and a front end loader in – 10 degrees and lives over a thousand miles away from his only child.

    So yes this did hit home with me.

    • phil white
      Posted January 16, 2013 at 9:32 am | Permalink

      Being a member of Oath Keepers and cognizant of the John Irish and Sthephanie Taylor child snatching case I can understand the fears of white nationalist parents.
      That fear is one way the Marxist control our activism.
      The one thing white dissident parents can hope for is that their children aren’t snatched while still infants or toddlers.
      If a child is stolen by the state after the age of six the future young adult will certainly find their way home to their family, carrying a healthy disrespect for the state as baggage.
      This year there was an attempt orchestrated by FBI and the local Democratic sherrif to entrap me with a pot possesion charge. We all are going to have our problems in the next few years.
      I think we may need something like a second New Orleans Protocal. It should address illegal actions against white dissident families that are taken by the cultural Marxizt officials of the current regime. It should state our determination to hold future trials of current officials for their political crimes, most notably chld snatching.
      I suggest such future trials be held under an international court; at Nuremberg. After all, there was a certain railway carriage in Paris that was used to sign one surrenender document in 1918, and was used a second time in 1940. What goes around comes around.

  5. Sandy
    Posted January 15, 2013 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

    Catherine Austin-Fitts has a new YouTube in which amongst other subjects she defends her ownership of an assault gun. Starts at 9.50 but the whole talk is worth the listen.

  6. regularron
    Posted January 15, 2013 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

    This truly is one of the best pieces I have read in a long time Greg. You have described my feelings for these people perfectly.

    Keep up the great work.

  7. David
    Posted January 15, 2013 at 5:45 pm | Permalink

    I’m amazed this hasn’t gotten more responses and links. I expected this to go viral as soon as I saw it.

    To quote the article:

    “Let’s spell it out. Resisting government tyranny with rifles means that Americans will someday shoot the servants of the state when some line is crossed. This means killing police officers, soldiers, security personnel, and, presumably, politicians. Forget euphemism – are conservatives willing to say what they are actually proposing?

    “Of course, a typical American conservative would protest that he’s not saying we should shoot people now, but at some future point when a line is crossed. Some of my more dedicated libertarian colleagues are fond of quoting that “we are at that awkward point where it is too late to work within the system but too early to start shooting the bastards.” Fair enough. Who do we shoot and when? Where is the line?”

    Does this not get to the very HEART of all the American faux tough guy posing? Their mincing, qualified answers to this bullseye question will expose them as the cowards they are. All their “Support the Troops” gatherings and NRA meetings are here exposed as the beta male, self-deceiving activities they are at heart, when they fail to address this.

    So please share this article with others!

    • Posted January 15, 2013 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

      This essay forces the conservative reader to directly confront his political impotence and recognize his “come and get ’em!” blustering for the foolishness it is. I fear it’s just a bit too honest in its analysis and treatment of the issue to “go viral.”

      It also breaks the taboo against publishing an essay which is exactly 1,488 words. …Meta!

    • Mimir's Well
      Posted January 16, 2013 at 11:19 am | Permalink

      The “Odin help us” comment will keep it from going viral…

  8. phil white
    Posted January 15, 2013 at 8:15 pm | Permalink

    We need guns for the same reason the U.S. needed ICBM’s in 1965, to be able to kill people.
    As to shooting U.S. troops or police, in that event we would be helping some U.S. troops kill other U.S. troops according to prof. Nathan Freier of the Army War college.
    (See his 2008 paper, “Known Unknowns” reading from about pg. 30-33.)
    In the meantime, our best defense is to continue to work on the hearts and minds of the 20% or so of any populaiton that can be swayed by a reasonable presentation of a good logical argument.

    • David
      Posted January 15, 2013 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

      (I’ll preface this comment by saying that the sanctity of all human life is my prime moral belief, and that the situations where I believe it’s allowable to take another life is vanishingly small.)

      Based upon my experience, any thoughts that a rebellion of any sort (whether it were an attempted coup, or a secession, or an erratic large-scale Waco of people just fending off a government raid) would be done wholly by private citizens, and wholly AGAINST cops and troops.

      My primary reason for saying this is the common sense observation that cops and soldiers are, by and large, institutionalized and servile types of people – the sort of man who grovels to power, not who fights it. The true alpha males that I know are working as chefs, HVAC, as contractors, etc. These are dudes who, by their genetic make-up, want to go their own way – nail women on weekends, play video games on weeknights. Conversely, the sort of 18 year-old who runs off to the safety and security of the military (which is not a dangerous occupation) or who gets a degree in criminal justice and becomes a cop (there’s much overlap in these two groups, obviously) are those who cannot bare the uncertainty and competition of making their own way in the private sector. They need the security of a government job, as well as the inane idolatrous reverence they get from the American “citizens” – who cops and troops openly mock in their intra-group rhetoric.

      Thus, waiting for the approval of this group of security-seeking institutionalized people is simply illogical.

      Armed government men – cops and troops – are the people who are going to be shooting AT you, not getting shot FOR you.

      • phil white
        Posted January 16, 2013 at 10:16 am | Permalink

        If you are trying to prove rebellion is unwise, at this stage I agree. We should be doing whitakeronline .org practical politics (I am) and supportiong
        But due to the demographic shift a civil war may be inevitable by now.
        As to what would happen after an initial civilian revolt rather than contrast your opionion with that of Col. Freier I’d look at relevant history. Often significant numbers of troops do go over to the revolution, or as in the case of the 1991 Russian revolution, the Army sat it out in barracks.

  9. Posted January 15, 2013 at 10:18 pm | Permalink

    You’re right about the beltway types. They’re too invested in the system right now. Half-wit pundits and guys making six figures in politics aren’t taking up arms against anyone.

    It’s going to take some sort of cognitive break for people to go from flag waving to “Death to America.” I don’t think it can happen overnight. They’re going to have to understand that the America they see in their heads really, really, really is not coming back, and the country will never again belong to them in its current form.

    That’s kind of why I’ve been hammering away at the “who is us” and “who is them” theme. I only recently came around to thinking of the State as “them” myself. My grandfathers both fought in WWII, and I grew up thinking America was swell. It’s an alien kind of thinking for someone raised to think of himself as a law-abiding citizen to see the state as an illegitimate oppressor and contemplate taking any sort of anti-state action.

    The rules all change. Your entire identity has to change.

    I do think there are guys who will legitimately resist and start shooting people if the gun ban is more than they are willing to abide *at once. * Executive order seems to be the line.

    And I also think there are huge numbers of military, ex-military, law enforcement and ex-law enforcement who will go over. They are going to be torn, because this affects THEIR people. A lot of those guys are serious 2nd Amendment Gun guys (many are my readers) and I think they would have serious problems going after their shooting buddies and firearms instructors.

    I was (accidentally) listening to Glenn Beck go on about this today. He pretty much had it right. I think Obama’s going to put his finger to the wind and pass a “sensible compromise” that is intrusive but not TOO intrusive. It won’t be enough to push the radicals over the edge in droves. Then in 2 months or 6, there will be another mass shooting, and he’ll make another “sensible compromise.”

    • Lew
      Posted January 15, 2013 at 11:22 pm | Permalink

      It might kick off the way the libertarian writer John Ross envisioned it in Unintended Consequences. Timothy McVeigh said in prison if he had known about the book he would have become a sniper. I’ve always wondered if Ross got his basic plot idea from Hunter. He would never admit it.

      Basically, the premise has the ATF committing a Waco-type atrocity. The protagonist decides to kill the agents involved. It gets media attention. Then, copy cats start killing government agents.

      In the alternative, maybe somebody with nothing to lose will do an Anders Breivik on a media or anti-gun activist gathering. I don’t think these hardcore gun radicals are stupid. They’re not going to bang it out where there is no hope of success against SWAT teams or the military. They’ll choose softer but just as deserving targets.

      I’m not advocating anything just speculating for the sake of hypotherical discussion.

      • phil white
        Posted January 16, 2013 at 9:47 am | Permalink

        A hypothetical seed of an idea.

    • phil white
      Posted January 16, 2013 at 9:58 am | Permalink

      “It’s going to take some sort of cognitive break for people to go from flag waving to “Death to America.” I don’t think it can happen overnight. They’re going to have to understand that the America they see in their heads really, really, really is not coming back, and the country will never again belong to them in its current form.”

      That’s why most of us here welcomed the Obama re-election, and especially the left’s gloating over the demographic inevitability of total white dispossession.

  10. Lew
    Posted January 15, 2013 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

    People have been telling me they’re going to bury or hide their guns. In each case, I’ve had to remind them of that old joke — if we have to bury our guns to hide them from the government, now is the time to dig them up.

    Disarmament is more personally concrete than these other oppressive acts. You can always retreat to your home despite forced integration of public spaces. With disarmament, they’re coming into your home to take both your symbolic and literal means of self-defense, stripping away what remains of white dignity. It’s just about the last hurdle they have to leap before the boot can start stamping.

    It remains to be seen if Americans are made of sterner stuff than the Australians and the British. They surrendered their weapons without a fight. The British especially are suffering for it. Maybe it’s wishful thinking, but, on this matter, I think we may see meaningful resistance. This confluence of circumstances, having guns taken away while the other side cackles about whites becoming an irrelevant minority, and also being scapegoated for a monstrous atrocity, may have triggered something meaningful in the white psyche.

    FBI data shows whites have bought enough guns in the last two months to equip the Chinese army. Does it make sense they’re buying them just to lay down? It seems more like a collective middle finger.

  11. Bobby
    Posted January 15, 2013 at 11:44 pm | Permalink

    Mr. Hood so nailed the “conservative” image in the U.S. that he didn’t leave an atom more to say about them. His thinking has followed in most places my own line of thought on conservative bravado. Yes indeed. As he says, these clowns are going to remove the God Bless Our Troops stickers from their SUV’s and fight the marines!!!??? The very thought of it is enought to cause one to fall to the ground with exhaustion from excess laughter.

  12. Jaego
    Posted January 16, 2013 at 12:30 am | Permalink

    The Revolutionary War started with an attempted gun grab in Concord, Massachusetts. This fact is quite important to Patriots. And secondly, some serious people (not Beltway blowhards) are coming out and saying it. And they consider Republicans to be scum btw. If you want a peek, go here:

    A parallel: The Irish Easter Rebellion, planned for years, had been betrayed. The IRA faced years of dreary reorganization. Patrick Pearse said no, we go ahead anyway. We need a blood sacrafice. So they went ahead and were crushed. Blocks and blocks of downtown Dublin were destroyed and the people were cursing them. But then the executions by the British began and when James Connolly was shot strapped to his wheelchair, the heart of the People opened and Ireland was reborn. Likewise, American Patriots seem committed to not firing first – just as they waited for the British to fire first at Legington Green. So after a number of atrocities, the moral high ground will be clear to all. The only question is who will offer themselves up as the Lambs? There’s alot of old Vetrans, utterly disgusted with America, who seem quite willing….

    I agree that the Elite have used incrementalism, the salami slicer, the frog slowing boiling – with devastating effect. And it looks like they’re going to again tomorrow. But they do seem to be in a hurry now in general and the Line in the Sand is clear. Why is it guns? Well, I could fill pages with quotations – but basically, the 2nd Ammendment is the Teeth of the Constitution. Without it, the rest are meaningless because they will be lost. And it’s only us and Switzerland now – everyone else has been mostly disarmed. The Elite obviously consider them important – perhaps they know what a gifted sniper can do. And America, with its huge forests, endless mountains, gigantic chaotic cities – is perfect for Guerilla warfare. Hopefully, saner heads will prevail and the Elite will renounce their quest for complete power and let America be the special place, the City on a Hill that it was meant to be.

    • phil white
      Posted January 16, 2013 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

      Thanks for the link.

  13. anonymous white man
    Posted January 16, 2013 at 2:42 am | Permalink

    Jesus, what a depressing article. You are completely right, of course. I’ve tried for years to wake people up and I’ve had very limited success, the people that are willing to listen are few. At this point I feel so burned out and hopeless. I don’t even know what to do except sit here with a tumbler of bourbon, my straight billard, and wait for the day when it becomes so in your face that it can no longer be denied, except by then I don’t think there will be enough of us left to do anything about it.

  14. Accipitor
    Posted January 16, 2013 at 6:28 am | Permalink

    People do not value freedom — they value COMFORT. They think “belly full, warm spot to sleep, nobody hitting me… I’m cool.” Consider that even lifers in prison rarely riot, despite being deprived of freedom and women, and having utterly nothing to lose. They’re comfortable, and a riot would make them less so.
    The American Revolution started with men defending the guns they used to put meat on the table, while moderns use their guns as toys and as very-occasional defense against a threat whose nature they can’t bring their delicate, politically-correct selves to directly articulate.
    The Revolutionaries also had leadership — respected elites who boldly said “Yo, let’s fight!” Where are such people today? I was told once that most of the cattle in a stampede have no actual problem, they’re just running because the alpha steer is. We have no alpha steer.
    Americans will fight when they’re hungry or in genuine, sustained, large-scale peril. Their guns will be taken up long before that. They should be focusing any preparatory efforts on learning rifle disarms, wilderness survival, and IED manufacture, but they won’t do that because they’re more focused on their shiny blued-steel toys. “The only thing men learn from history is that men learn nothing from history.”

    • phil white
      Posted January 16, 2013 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

      “The Revolutionaries also had leadership — respected elites who boldly said “Yo, let’s fight!” Where are such people today? I was told once that most of the cattle in a stampede have no actual problem, they’re just running because the alpha steer is. We have no alpha steer.”
      “The Patriot” Mel Gibson “Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world.”

  15. Lew
    Posted January 16, 2013 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

    Standard WNist analysis requires viewing Obama as a front man who reads prepared scripts written for him by the world’s real powers. His attack on gun rights should therefore be viewed as coming from the highest levels of the global elite. There probably is no single “elite” but rather independent factions and overlapping factions within it. Of these factions, there is exactly one that is consumed with irrational, pathological hatred for armed white Americans. Armed white Americans don’t stand in the way of the US Chamber of Commerce’s profit agenda. They could, at least in theory, stand in the way of organized Jewry’s white genocide agenda.

    So, Jews, as usual, are driving this, both openly and behind the scenes I’m sure (with a lot of essential help from goy traitors and useful idiots also as usual). And given how Jews operate, through subversion, lies, terrorism, false flags, psyops, you name it, I think it raises the question whether the Aurora and Newtown massacre were Jewish-orchestrated false flags.

    There is a gun lobbyist that claims he met with Joe Manchin. He says Manchin personally told him the next step will be the airing of photos of children’s corpses in the mass media. Could be disinformation; you never know what’s BS. That tactic, however – an attempt to inflict mass psychlogical trauma — fits with how they operate.

  16. Lew
    Posted January 16, 2013 at 9:56 pm | Permalink

    OK, this afternoon I sold 1000 rounds of .223 from an ad I placed on a local gun site. When I met the guy, he asked for help getting the ammo in the trunk. I said sure, no problem. When he opened the trunk, I saw body armor, a Kevlar helmet, magazines, goggles, belts, vests, holsters, canisters and a lot of military-looking stuff.

    So I asked the guy if he was in the military. He said he used to be but now he owns a security company. He added he works part-time as a police officer, on a special tactics team. He then went into his background and told me he has trained with special units in Florida and with the FBI.

    So I said “no shit, so let me ask you a question.” He said sure, go ahead.

    I asked him straight up “what’s the sentiment of rank-and-file police officers on Obama’s gun control laws?”

    He said nobody supports them, not on his team, and not on any team they train with. He told me they train with the special units from surrounding parishes all the time. He said nobody supports them. He said he knows a lot of current and ex-military. Nobody supports them.

    I asked him if he caught Obama’s press conference. He said he missed it. So I told him about it, and we ended up commiserating for about 20 minutes.

    Then, unsolicited, he told me “my team will never obey orders to take guns.”

    He told me if they get orders to go disarm a drug-dealing felon, that’s one thing, but they won’t disarm law-abiding people. Basically, he implied the lower-ranking police, the ones who actually do it as opposed to give the orders, won’t do it.

    I said “well if they give you orders to take a person’s guns they probably won’t tell you go take his guns; they’ll probably tell you this person is on the terrorist watch list…”

    He looked at me funny for a few seconds, as if this possibility had never occurred to him, then finally said “yeah, well we’re not stupid.”

    Then, again unsolicited, he told me “we’re looking into this group called the Oath Keepers.” I told I’d heard of it. Then I added “I don’t think most gun control advocates are bad people; I just don’t think they’ve thought though the logic of their position.” I said “I do think there are some really bad people at the top of our government.”

    His response – and this is what stuck in my head — was “I *USED* to think our government was good. *NOW*, I’m not so sure.”

    To sum it up, he didn’t look like a fat, fox news-watching conservative blowhard, or a government employee looking to collect a pay check. He was fit, poised, well dressed, driving about a $50,000 car, alpha male type. He was really animated talking about disobeying illegal orders.

    As I was driving back to my office, I found myself thinking about Jonathan Haidt and Kevin MacDonald and this idea that people attach themselves to moral narratives. These narratives then drive their thinking, perceptions of the world, and segregation into warring political teams.

    This guy has probably spent his whole life caught up the “America” narrative, that America is great, the government is good and so on. I think instead of belittling these conservatives (I’m talking about rank-and-file not Beltway elite) we would do better redoubling our efforts to educate them, pull them away from the mainstream, and make the moral case for WNism.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted January 16, 2013 at 10:09 pm | Permalink

      Very interesting story. We definitely need to reach these people. Thanks to you, we already are.

  17. Matt Strictland
    Posted January 17, 2013 at 1:06 am | Permalink

    Partiots =/= Conservatives

    Besides Conservatives want to well Conserve the system they to benefit from. As Nomenklatura I wouldn’t expect them to want a fight.

    However as to getting there. People cannot wake up all at once. The awakening is very new for the bulk of people, maybe a few years old and any movement takes time to spread. This one is spreading crazy fast and I even here Hannity and Coulter saying stuff not that far off from what you might here.

    Still we’ve come a long way since the 90’s in terms of what people are willing to consider (I was there as a lad) and how many it is getting stropier out there and while the article is probably correct in that we aren’t there yet ,here is a rub.

    About 100 million people in the US own guns, a well timed uprising by just 3% (the number bandied about at places like Sipsey Street) or 5%, just 1 in 20 would be enough to basically turn the US inside out. Assuming 90% were stopped without a kill that could still be 300,000-500,000 inflicted causulties — at least 75% that of WW2 !

    Besides, ignoring the FBI issue very few people have any idea of what kind of State would replace the one we have. I’ve seen folks bring this up with “patriots” at least online and they glaze over. What they cannot understand, to win you must lead and rule .

    I suppose they could go all Sendero Luminoso on the system but it won’t accomplish anything.

    Worse of the few systems out there no one wants to live in someone elses. I don’t care much for Russel Longcore’s “FRONA” concept and as someone who also has a fondness for the Old Gods (though I am nominally Christian) a lot of the suggested ethnostates are either too Trad-Con American , too Capitalist or too coercivly Christian for me .

    No one sems to have any idea of how to form a moderate, modern, White ethnostate that resemebles at least some of the better ideas (like Freedom of Religion) we have and cleans away the cruft.

    Also we may not need to be violent . As I see it the US is basically a a person with cancer on crank. The outside looks well enough if you don’t look at the makeup plastered over everything but inside, its dying. You can smell the rot

    We are in a way caught in thay song the Dead Flag Blues

    the car’s on fire and there’s no driver at the wheel
    and the sewers are all muddied with a thousand lonely suicides
    and a dark wind blows
    the government is corrupt
    and we’re on so many drugs
    with the radio on and the curtains drawn

    we’re trapped in the belly of this horrible machine
    and the machine is bleeding to death

    the sun has fallen down
    and the billboards are all leering
    and the flags are all dead at the top of their poles

    it went like this:

    the buildings tumbled in on themselves
    mothers clutching babies picked through the rubble
    and pulled out their hair

    the skyline was beautiful on fire
    all twisted metal stretching upwards
    everything washed in a thin orange haze

    i said: “kiss me, you’re beautiful –
    these are truly the last days”

    you grabbed my hand and we fell into it
    like a daydream or a fever

    we woke up one morning and fell a little further down –
    for sure it’s the valley of death

    Getting out of that without shedding blood, especially good White blood is a challenge but its one I think we can muster.

  18. RobRoy
    Posted January 17, 2013 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

    Don’t back the State into a corner, allow them their little ghettos like New England or Hollywood.

    Some comment above mentioned the moral factor, well that’s bingo. The only figure with any moral authority these days is Obama himself, but that popularity is coming from people with the outlook and mannerisms of teenaged white girls, the Adolescent-American demographic group, and his fellow racialists of course.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    Here’s the Thing

    Trevor Lynch: Part Four of the Trilogy

    Graduate School with Heidegger

    It’s Okay to Be White


    The Enemy of Europe

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs


    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles


    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace