30 Seconds and a baseball bat to fix America

Violence strengthens the opposing side, either with sentiment, or with counter violence. There was a liberal revolution of ignorance last year, and no shots were fired.
The keyboard is becoming mightier than the sword.

I have to disagree with you here. The target(s) are not in question. I am not angry, but I know the target(s).

In my view, that is not the problem. The problem is that too few people are interested in assailing those targets. Any action would be short lived and futile. There is an almost insignificant number of people who understand and are interested in freedom and the constitution. The latter has been ignored so long that its meaning has passed out of memory.

I apologize, but since I'm reading Royce at the moment you get quotes from him:

If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight for survival. There may be even a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

----Winston Churchill

Royce feels that "We're probably already at the "worse case. ...We've only ourselves to blame.

"We should have strung up Congress for handing monetary control to a private consortium of bankers and then dragging us into WWI in 1917. We should have resisted in the 1930s during FDR's atrocious "social" programs and the confiscation of our gold. We should have shouted down the 1945 U.N. We should have pushed through the righteous tax revolt of the late 1970s instead of accepting the sop presidency of Ronald Reagan. We should have hounded out the Clintonistas after the murder of the Branch Davidians. Etc. Etc. Etc.

"The only times when we stood up to the Government were in 1794 (Whiskey Rebellion) and 1860 (the secession of the South over economic autonomy---not slavery). Other than that, we have chickened out on a dozen crucial opportunities to rein in Washington. Evil has triumphed because good men have done nothing. We've become a paper tiger and Congress is not longer afraid of us. The servant now scoffs at his master, and the servant's bulldog routinely sinks its teeth in our legs.

"If there's one constant to bullies it's that they're bluff. Knock their teeth in suddenly and they crumple every time. It's only difficult and scary the first time. All they need is some long-overdue fear and they'll run.
...

"Jefferson spoke of occasional mild rebessions for America's health. Rebellions are sort of like vomiting. The prospect is very unpleasant, but you feel so much better afterwards. We've been so queasy with political poisoning for so long, but we won't hug a toilet and stick a finger down our national throat. We're so afraid of vomiting that we'd rather stay queasy. Well, if we wait to vomit on the poison's timetable, we will be too weak and ill to recover by then.

-----------------------------

"Democrats are not the problem. Republicans and Libertarians are the problem. Republicans without the intellectual stamina to become Libertarians, and Libertarians without the physical courage to become Riflemen.

----------------------------

And I don't advocate violence at this time, but it's not because we do not know the targets, it is not because violence has no part is securing liberty, it is because we have no hope for success. I do not see that this means we will never have hope for success. There are at least some relatively young people like me who didn't know much about what was going on and had never thought seriously about the constitution until recently.

I hope you don't get pissed at me Mike or K"oln (and maybe delete my post), but I gotta get to the range.

http://www.fredsm14stocks.com/articles.asp

see especially http://www.fredsm14stocks.com/article.asp?ITEM=39

http://www.fredsm14stocks.com/columns.asp

I have to agree with you Mike. People call for violent action, but against whom, exactly. If we had SS Troops marching the streets, accosting people and enforcing curfews, there would be an obvious target. Sadly, that day may come and if it does, I am absolutely supportive of a violent approach. Here and now, who would you target? A local deputy? He is just a guy, and probably a decent one, raising a family, investigating local crime and ticketing speeders.

While I do not deny that a handful of snipers with 535 bullets could change the world, but what would they change it to? Clearly the people of our country are not yet ready for a revolution, not one at the ballot box or in the streets. Until they are truly ready for a change back to freedom, jumping the gun could lead to a worse dictatorship than we have now. Action for now includes educating others, supporting those trying to protect our borders, supporting the Continental Congress '09, working to take our local political parties, both Democrat and Republican, and working hard to get the publicity we need about what is happening. With a lot of work and a little luck, maybe we can pull off a complete overthrow of our current politicians the old fashioned way: By getting them voted out! We just have to hope they don't back us into a corner.

Pat

BOHICA!!

People took sides in the American Revolution and in the Civil War. There was organized violence in the form of traditional battles, and there was personal, random violence, neighbor against neighbor based on which side you were on.

The predominant feature of the next great outburst of civil violence will be survival rather than political disagreement. Natures invisible hand will command us to reduce our numbers, so the whole point of the violent squabble over the scarce necessities of life will be to eliminate competitors (kill one another).

When I moved to a rural area more than 30 years ago, one of the things I was surprised to find that types of snakes had territories, and that in you found areas where there were mostly only one kind of snake. The locals knew which hill or hollow had an abundance of copperheads. Seems that some places are more hospitable to certain snakes, but also that one type of snake will drive out other types, sometimes by eating them, but they don't eat their own kind. I understand that most species have a mechanism to keep members from killing one another except under unusual circumstances.

So I think that in the coming struggle to literally survive, that those humans we see as most different from ourselves will be the easiest to squabble with. We are much more likely to share what we have with our family members than to kill one another, but it will be easier to kill a stranger over who gets the last apple. I think that on a national level that ethnicity will play a major role in who fights whom. Perhaps it will develop something like described in "Civil War Two" where the author sees the US breaking up into three countries, Hispanic southwest, Black south and White north. And within those nations ethnic cleansing will occur, as well as struggles between urban liberal areas, and rural conservative areas. A reaction against those formerly in power, similar to the execution of aristocrats during the French Revolution is a possible feature of what is coming, as revenge seems to be something people crave in such times.

I think the end result will be a significant reduction in population from starvation, disease, and violence and more local political control. The old US will no longer exist.

I don't think we will get past 2020 without civil disorder erupting. Its going to be a play it by ear situation as nobody know all the little twists and turns history will take. Ten years before the American Revolution or ten years before the Civil War, most did not see them coming. I think I smell the smoke from the as yet unseen next conflagration.