Counter-Currents
1,345 words
Thousands of gun owners rallied in Richmond, Virginia on Martin Luther King Day to protest the state’s new gun laws.
This rally was one of the largest right-wing demonstrations in recent memory and effectively communicated citizen dissent against gun control. Nothing violent happened, bad optics were at a minimum (but goofy optics were aplenty), and conservative media lionized the demonstrators. Liberal journalists embarrassed themselves with their desire to portray the protests as a neo-Nazi revolt. The protests were a clear win for the Second Amendment crowd and follow the rise of gun sanctuaries in Virginia. Dozens of towns and counties in the Old Dominion vow to not enforce the state’s new gun laws.
Virginia’s gun fight is a happening that points in a positive direction for future resistance against dispossession. Many doomers have said Americans would hand over their guns without so much as a complaint. Virginia proves them wrong.
While the resistance toward gun laws is good, there are issues with the gun crowd from an identitarian perspective. Many ardent gun nuts are just as “anti-racist” as the worst cucks of the conservative movement. They want to keep the issue to just the guns themselves—a material object—and uphold hyper-individualism. The gun issue is implicitly racial, and only whites support gun rights. But the ones who make the biggest fuss about it are trying their hardest to keep the issue from becoming an identitarian cause.
This does not mean the issue is not worth fighting for and that their efforts are bad. It just means we need to push the issue in the right direction.
Guns are one of the few issues that Middle Americans will rise up over. That does not mean they will start the second American revolution—it just means they will find ways to resist a gun grab. Many right-wingers fantasize about a mass violent uprising if the government passed gun control. It wouldn’t be like that, but an oppositional force would arise that would effectively nullify the law. Take the example of gun sanctuaries.
At least 90 percent of Virginia’s counties have declared themselves gun sanctuaries, meaning they won’t enforce the state’s proposed new laws. The state legislature passed three laws last week that would expand background checks on firearm purchases and restrict where a person could take a firearm. The state is considering a red flag law that would allow judges to revoke the gun rights of any individual he deems a threat. Red flag laws could be used to bar dissidents from owning a gun. Other states have used red flag laws to disarm shitposters who joked about the Joker premiere.
Fortunately, rural Virginia does not want to enforce any gun law the legislature passes, putting the state in an uncomfortable position. The new gun laws have sparked a backlash that defies expectations about boomers and Middle Americans. Rather than complaining about the issue on the internet, they’ve taken to the streets, taken over town halls, and forced their local officials to support their gun rights. This speech from one local sheriff demonstrates how serious the gun boomers are.
Sheriff: I WILL NOT ENFORCE ANY UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW. ????????????????????????????????????????
We are behind you all the way #Virginia #NRA #Trump #VirginiaRally #America pic.twitter.com/O33qh0shTw
— 1776 (@1776Attitude) January 16, 2020
Gov. Ralph Northam is not going to send in the National Guard to enforce expanded background checks; Northam can just hope the courts take his side and force rural counties to comply.
The gun sanctuaries possibly foreshadow what would happen if there was a national gun confiscation program. A few rural sheriffs would say they would not participate in such an “unconstitutional” practice. Then a red state governor would say he’s ordered all state officials to not follow the law. Then a few more governors would defy the law. Eventually, half the country would say it wouldn’t enforce the law, and the national government would likely back down. It can’t send the Marines to every part of rural America. Libs don’t have the guts to commit to the kind of violence and militarization that gun confiscation would require—at this moment at least. That’s why they’ve moved on to red flag laws, which would allow left-wing judges and bureaucrats to take guns away from political enemies incrementally.
Gun rights are implicitly a racial issue. The Second Amendment was enacted so the founding stock could defend themselves against Indian raiders and slave uprisings. The founders wanted its citizens to be capable of self-defense. The right to bear arms is a core part of being a citizen; to not have the right makes one a mere subject. Americans still need this right to protect their homes and families. Liberals support gun control because it strips white Americans of their self-defense. They want all Americans dependent on our corrupt nanny state, and the elites see armed whites as the real threat to their power. Armed non-whites, on the other hand, are just part and parcel of life in modern America. Liberals will gleefully share photos of rifle-toting Black Panthers but get triggered by white guys in tactical gear.
Many conservatives prefer to say we need guns to defeat tyranny and insist the Jews could’ve overthrown Hitler if they had guns. (The historical illiteracy required to believe the last point is too much to bear.) It’s far more reasonable to say Americans need guns for self-defense and self-defense is a cornerstone of citizenship, just like the right to vote. But nope, gun advocates believe their home arsenal will topple the federal government when it refuses to sufficiently respect Israel.
Gun nuts’ extreme individualism precludes them from presenting a threat to the federal government. They’re not united by their love for their community or people; they just really care about this one object. Many revolts have occurred over things more minor than gun confiscation, but gun nuts insist that their cause is separated from anything bigger than the guns themselves. This mentality isolates them and makes their “boogaloo” fantasies the stuff of mid-life crises. They imagine the resistance can begin in their suburban cul-de-sac, and all it takes is for the brave soul to walk out of his garage decked out in discount marine attire.
Many of the militia groups that indulge in fedposting are just as opposed to “racists” as the federal government. Oath Keepers assaulted racial nationalists who attended their events in 2017 and publicly condemned anyone who may think America has a racial basis.
Supporters of the Richmond Rally were thrilled to find a few black attendees and made sure to highlight them as the face of the event. Supporters were desperate to prove that gun rights have nothing to do with white identity.
However, gun rights will only be protected by whites. Whites are the only group where the majority (54 percent) believe it’s more important to protect gun rights than impose gun control. Seventy-five percent of Hispanics and 66 percent of blacks think the exact opposite. Asians favor stricter gun laws by an astounding seven-to-one margin.
Demographic change will tread on you, Mr. libertarian gun owner.
In spite of the gun nuts’ cringe, gun rights are still a good fight, and demonstrations like the Richmond Rally push Middle America into the right direction. Gun rights are arguably the second most important issue after immigration, and this debate offers the opportunity to awaken whites to their demographic plight. Guns are an integral part to white American culture and to lose the right to bear them signals our dispossession.
If a Democrat wins in 2020, gun control will be a top priority. There will be more happenings like Virginia, and more whites will feel empowered to stand up for their rights. They just need to realize that these rights will depend on a majority white America. Globalists, effeminate white liberals, and non-whites want to take your guns. The libertarians can whine about identity politics all they want and how gun rights transcend this paradigm. But the gun issue is as much about identity politics as immigration.
Only a nice white country can guarantee your right to bear arms.
18 comments
I thought the event was a success. Just imagine what the White identitarian movement could do, and in a short time at that, if Whites would mobilize and take to the streets to fight racial dispossession. Suppose all those people who attended the rally went to the US-Mexican border to stop the invasion. If the attendance numbers at events are high enough, then Charlotteseville-type state tactics will fail.
But the big, strong well-armed guys wuss out over the prospect of being called racists–that ought to be a slur on their manhood. It has all happened in my lifetime (I’m 63). I still remember the chant, “Two, four, six, eight, we don’t want to integrate!” from the 1950s-early ’70s. Whites rioted in Boston, of all places, and Arkansas. Yes, the racial Right had chants, too.
(By the way, when did “not to” change to “to not”? I can still see the red marks on my papers from my freshman year in college.)
I would count myself as part of the gun crowd. One thing different about this country is the number of guns in citizens’ hands (some 300,000,000). I remember a viral post–it may have come from Ted Nugent–that said, in the event of civil war, “One side has 300,000,000 guns and trillions of rounds of ammunition; the other side doesn’t know which bathroom to use.” Poignant, but at this time, impotent.
I own guns and go to the range regularly. If for no other reason, then beauty.:I find guns beautiful objects, always have. And who would deny that the ability to shoot well is a valuable skill to have. America is a dangerous place. I like being a gun-toting intellectual. Consider the image of the sword-carrying European aristocrat: a complete man, not an effete bourgeois. Part of being a man is having the ability to defend oneself. I walk around confidently, knowing my chance of becoming a crime victim is less than the unarmed person’s. I know, I know, we’re victimized on a daily basis by the cultural and political authorities.
But maybe, just maybe, this 2A event is a harbinger of what’s to come. I think it’s clear that the issue that will “trigger” mass White action will most likely not be (“be not”?) the real issue, but something tangential: like restrictive gun laws.
Dozens of towns and counties in the Old Dominion vow to not enforce the state’s new gun laws.
@ D.M. About “to not” VS “not to”. Split infinitives are okay. Sometimes (indeed, quite often) they sound way better.
I recall a defender of the split infinitive saying that the harsh disapproval of split infinitives originated with Latin professors; condemnation of the split infinitive also had the support of the bombastic, mannered William Buckley. No surprise there. Forcing unsplit infinitives when they sound awkward (which is most of the time) has been nothing more than an affectation from Day One.
Over to you. And have the last word. To not invite you to do so would be ungracious on my part.
To be or…to not be?
The split-in. often does sound better–point well taken!
Almost as confused as Anglin, who opposed the rally, was shown to be wrong about that, then counters with a call for Christianity (yikes!) While ranting and raving about race mixing and immigration which are actually core pillars of Christianity going back to Saul the Herodian and his fight against nationalists like James the Just!
Perhaps the simple lesson is that the movement does better when Naziism and such are not included (read the Alt Right).
We used to be a Ron Paul – Gold movement, now we are a Trump – Bitcoin movement (double yikes!!)
“gun advocates believe their home arsenal will topple the federal government when it refuses to sufficiently respect Israel.”
Hard to hear, but true.
We are in a slow decline. The erosion of central authority will continue as the country passes. We live in the decline and there will be no heroic moment.
The real threat is Leftism (socialism/communism):
https://www.culturecritique.com/politics/never-any-end-to-leftism/
Mr. Hampton, you posit that this event has discredited Doomers. I respectfully disagree. As you pointed out, this was a rally of obese Boomers LARPing in tactical gear and worshipping the handful of blacks in attendance while complaining about “fascism,” blackface, and the right to own guns for guns’ sake. Seeing the Right celebrate this disgraceful display as a victory is just blackpilling me further. Surely we can do better.
It was successful in the sense that it showed the world gun owning whites peacefully protesting, and it made liberal media look unhinged with their predictions of crazy white men starting race war.
The downside was the ridiculous military larping by fat fucks — those idiots showed up looking exactly how the media portrays them — although a few were feds.
“Gun rights are implicitly a racial issue.”
Well all the signs I saw were ANTI-RACIST, there were mixed race couples. Signs for LGBTGQ and literally every Jewish issue you could think of, more “NAZIS KILLED JEWS” and the Sainted Rapist Martin Luther King, and on and on and on.
How ANYONE could take solace in this DISGUSTING FARCE is beyond me.
In Lebanon and Syria and Iraq people own, without government permission, real “assault” rifles, i.e. selective fire, they own RPGs and this is kept in their APARTMENTS!!!
And let me tell you THEY USE THEM.
Just ordinary families. And as America continues the demographic replacement there won’t be whites using REAL military weapons to secure their families and protect their fellow whites.
UNLIKE the Muslims in the nations I mentioned.
How far whines have fallen…but at least they saved us from Hitler, and that is what the average white thinks today.
Good post to share with your conservative friends
This is why we must replace you goy.
Gun confiscation isn’t feasible because there are more legal guns than people in America and a non-trivial minority would shoot; it could turn into a bloodbath. Gun owners believe they have a moral/constitutional right and most of the white police/military enforcing the federal edicts to confiscate door-to-door support the 2nd amendment and would not want to risk getting shot at while trying to steal the guns of the white populace. That’s aside from the amount of money it would cost to confiscate hundreds of millions of guns and the level of local political opposition they would face. If they could just take the guns as they have in Britain they would have already done so, that’s why they seek to do it incrementally with “red flag laws”, “mandatory background checks”, “magazine/ammo limits” and “assault weapon bans”.
Abolishing 2A would criminalize and radicalize large sections of middle America against the government so it’s probably good. Legal owners aren’t willing to use the guns in any substantive way so they may as well lose their right.
Question: what are the long range political objectives of the 2nd Amendment movement?
Yes, the Richmond 2nd Amendment Rally was a tactical victory, and all the more so because it was up against the System: an antagonistic state government and hostile prestige media, as well as an obviously trumped up federal law enforcement effort against “White Supremacists.”
There are lessons to be learned here about self-organizing activism and mobilizing a wider array of groups pre-sold on gun rights, not to mention forming alliances with local law enforcement. The term 2nd Amendment sanctuary is a decent piece of agitprop, appropriating a term already legitimized by the left.
But what happens next?
Fact is, the US already has a Right to Bear Arms, but various gun laws have been upheld as constitutional. What happens when the Virginia state government proceeds with gun confiscation?
Some people entertain a scenario in which the gun-grabbers are met with open resistance by an aroused and armed citizenry, ala Lexington and Concord. Well, maybe. There have been armed uprisings in American history. Look at the Whiskey Rebellion. Or Bleeding Kansas. Or Athens, TN, August 1946. We can speculate about the outcome of any Big Boogaloo.
But there are other means of repression than SWAT teams kicking in doors in the middle of the night. The last several years have seen the outsourcing of repression: the de-platformings and de-monetization of dissidents, and using leftist mobs to shut down opposition events. It just may be the Virginia state government (or the people who pull its strings…) decided to let the 2nd Amendment people have their rally on 20 January, and even now are preparing for their counteroffensive. Liberals can not allow any hint of White organization, especially around firearms, as too many Americans might become red pilled. And no doubt Conservatism Inc ™ would sing the praises of capitalist corporations who make their market choices by canceling the credit cards of gun rights advocates. What happens the next time a law abiding gunowner uses lethal force in self defense and suddenly finds themself smeared in the corporate media for killing one of the sainted “unarmed teens?”
It comes back to the politics.
What is the end state desired by the 2nd Amendment movement? A return to normalcy? Well, normalcy is not in the cards as long as globalist politics remain in force: de-industrialization, deep state, de-platformings and the displacement of White Americans. If these trends continue, then all the gun-grabbers have to do is run out the clock and demographic trends will make the 2nd Amendment moot. And it’s not just about ensuring gun rights, but all rights under the Constitution, notably Free Speech (under attack by state, academia and corporations).
What it comes down to is that 2nd Amendment advocacy needs to turn into a wider political movement. It’s not just about the militia locking and loading their Barretts and parading down main street. It’s having fronts for info ops, lawfare, street-campus activism, civil disobedience and the rest of the panoply of political struggle as well as alternative online media and financial systems.
This in turn means recognizing that the threat is not just from Big Government but also Big Capital and Big NGO and Big Third World Migrations and the rest of the Great Big Globalist Coalition. Some kind of nationalist movement would have to arise with the express goal of gaining power and running this country for the American people.
The implications of the Richmond Rally bear more discussion…
+1000
The only right the 2nd amendment and the gun crowd protects is the right to buy more guns and the gun crowd has the worst facets of consumer culture there is with boomers and obese people dressing up like call of duty modern warfare charakters and buying pink plastic for their little girls so that she can fend off the criminals that breed in the urban centers that these people already evacuated. This is why i don’t care about gun ownership. Its just a lazy white flight response to deeper problems.
I broadly agree with the author, but I’ll pick a nit on the likelihood of a Current Year governor exercising nullification. I can’t imagine any governor of either party, current or next-generation, taking this step. They’re all too well-groomed for that.
I think nullification is going to be exclusively on the local government level and more often de facto than formal. Gun rights are undoubtedly a state-level issue in terms of political impact but I suspect statehouses will simply lock shields in support of Big Nanny and gas on about Lincoln & the legacy of slavery when asked about nullification. It’s also likely that the governors could effectively punt and beg Washington sub rosa to federalize the issue.
You’ll effectively see the same kind of fake politicians-only consensus we have on immigration – a choice between Amnesty Plan A & B, a debate over who can achieve the only acceptable result more efficiently. Concede the objectives and quibble over details.
I’m cautiously hopeful that there will be enough local nullification to render certain regions sufficiently “gun friendly.” In practice we’ll maintain the status quo. From the formal standpoint, I don’t like conceding ground on the legal side, but I think they’ll put a lot of gun owners in a grey area legally. It gives them a heavy club to hit you with in order to enforce Woke Compliance. Firearms violations carry some heavy penalties and expect Big Nanny and her brood of 50 statehouse sycophants will likely make those worse in the process.
I wonder why the jews picked this state to to pursue their gun control agenda in. Have you noticed they haven’t done a mass shooting psy-op in several months.
Just one nitpick: the armed citizens plus all patriotic sheriff and veterans and on duty soldiers combined could easily defeat the US military
https://medium.com/the-sword-and-shield/citizens-would-win-against-the-u-s-military-heres-how-ff336bd22bc5
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
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.
Paywall Access
Edit your comment