-
04-07-2019, 12:12 PM
#151
April 6, 2019
The Never-Ending Threat of Civil War
By E.M. Cadwaladr
We and the Left are now two nations within one country. This is undeniable. We are now so different that we cannot even agree on what a country is, or on the merits of a country having a border. The number of people who still say, "I just don't care about politics" dwindles. It is still possible to hate both sides — but it is getting hard to be indifferent and still be breathing. How many people can just take or leave infanticide? How many people are entirely flexible about the idea of the government having authority over anything and everything, to experimenting with our fundamental demographics, or to giving up fossil fuels cold turkey?
The "news," whether ours or theirs, focuses myopically on the daily round of legal wrangling that now completely lacks the power to resolve our differences. The law has degenerated into a mere procedural habit. Few people, and even fewer officials, were genuinely interested in whether Robert Mueller was pursuing the truth or not. The assumption, on both sides, was that he wasn't. What matters now is simply which side wins. We won this round, but we should not read too much into that fleeting, rather technical victory. We delude ourselves if we believe that a report, a statute, or a ruling will make either of the two antagonistic nations abandon their respective causes. Both sides will continue to play the legal game only so long as they believe that the law can keep their adversaries at bay. If either side is ever proven irrefutably wrong in that belief, violence will follow soon after as the option of default. History screams this truth — even to those who are too deaf to hear it. Nations, distinct peoples with their own deep feelings of identity, do not consent quietly to their own demise.
While I personally would dance an Irish reel to see a nationwide roundup of errant Democrat councilpersons for the crime of declaring their cities exempt from federal immigration law, I know that this would be a revolutionary detonator for the Left. Many leftists would certainly decide to pursue their ends "by any means necessary." Some of them have done so already. Just ask Steve Scalise. We have our breaking point, and they have theirs. Our two nations hang suspended over war's abyss, kept in mid-air temporarily by a tug-of-war of pundits, politicians, and overpaid attorneys. Our "leaders" are not quite ready to repudiate the only instruments of power they know how to wield, but in their cynical maneuvering, they have broken the very foundations of the rule of law itself. We have seen the two-tiered legal system and found it unworthy of respect. We have watched in quiet horror as a federal judge in Hawaii stuck his dainty legal foot in front of Trump's immigration order — but that's exactly how the game is played. You and I hold our breath, waiting for the shambling Frankenstein's monster of formalities to eventually keel over and drop dead. We wait for our side to finally draw a line and say, "Enough!" — or for their side to dig in and openly proclaim, "We won't be bound by a constitution written by old dead white men anymore!"
Consider the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact that a dozen states have now passed into law. These states have agreed to sign their citizens' electoral votes over to whatever presidential candidate wins the popular vote. In one sense, this may be constitutional. The framers allowed each state to determine for itself how its electors would be assigned. In another sense, such laws are clearly anti-constitutional. The framers quite explicitly intended to preserve the sovereignty of the less populous states, and a National Popular Vote Interstate Compact accomplishes just the opposite end. Such laws are nothing less than attempts by California and New York to nullify the interests of whole regions of the country. If the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact movement succeeds in achieving its golden number of 270 votes, will the state of Oklahoma, or Alabama, or Alaska, be content to have its votes made moot? At what point does such a clever lawyer's trick make secession less objectionable than the alternative?
The abyss looms large beneath us. We are stretched closer and closer to our limits.
The people who are eager for a civil war are fools. They don't understand the catastrophe they're begging for. But the people who believe that a civil war is now a real possibility are neither fools nor wild-eyed alarmists. Moreover, the people who believe that, grim though the prospect may be, war might be the lesser of two evils have a daily strengthening case. The Left has shown itself to be dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization itself. We have not been faced with such an existential threat since European armies threw the Turks back from Vienna in 1529. The fascists of the mid–2oth century, for all their loathsome policies, were not the kind of threat to the fabric of our society that we face now. Bad as they were, they did not seek the destruction of Europeans as a people, or of European culture as a living, breathing thing. Progressivism does. What could be more worthy of, if you will forgive the word, "resistance"?
We conservatives have let this ideological cancer metastasize for far too long for its excision to be simple or painless. For too long, we have been patient with outrages we should have fought to reverse. We have let our opponents secede incrementally from us for decades. We have been tolerant and patient. In our tolerance and patience, we have given up our civil society, our political representation, and our freedoms one by one. Our maladies won't be fixed by delicate adjustments now — half-heartedly performed by yet another generation of narcissistic government planners and invisible elitist bureaucrats. Intellectuals like George Will and think-tanks like the Heritage Foundation have done us little good. Our condition demands a radical, unflinching surgery if we, as a nation, are to survive. Either the cancer wins, and kills us all, or we defeat it — and we accept the scars. Let us not pretend they would not be hideous scars. And let us not pretend it would not be a deeply barbarous and bitter surgery.
The truth is that we, as individuals, have rather few decisions left to make. The titanic nations of the Left and right are rising en masse — flexing their muscles and snorting menacingly at one another. We cannot get out of their way. There is no safe part of the country, nor any genuinely safe haven left in any other country. This is a global conflict. We have run out of frontiers. There is only so much "prepping" one can do for an upheaval of this magnitude. We Americans have not seen such a calamity on our soil for six generations. What our ancestors knew, we have forgotten. The Civil War of our history has become a dim and comfortable myth. A new war leers at us like the devil, but we talk about it like a football game. We may learn as human beings have always learned — the hard way.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
“As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”
"You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
-
04-07-2019, 09:32 PM
#152
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
“As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”
"You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
-
04-07-2019, 10:09 PM
#153
Two More Washington Counties Join Anti-1639 Insurrection
April 4, 2019 By Dave Workman
Months after voters approved anti-gun-rights Initiative 1639 in Washington State, sentiments run high against it, to the point of county sheriffs and commissions deciding to not enforce it. (Screen snip)Two more county commissions in Washington State have taken stands against the enforcement of a controversial gun control initiative passed by voters last fall, while members of the state’s largest gun show operation, the Washington Arms Collectors WAC, have reached in their wallets to support the federal lawsuit now being waged against the measure.
Commissioners in Grays Harbor and Benton counties passed resolutions this week against enforcement of the initiative, which raised the minimum age to purchase a semiautomatic rifle to age 21 and classified all semi-auto rifles as so-called “assault weapons.” The measure also requires “safe storage” of guns, mandates training in order to legally purchase such a firearm, establishes a 10-day waiting period, and adds a fee for paperwork to purchase a self-loading rifle.
Opponents have called it an “extremist” piece of legislation that was financed by Seattle-based billionaires and may be unconstitutional considering a ruling by a federal judge in California that struck down that state’s ban on large capacity magazines.
U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, in his 86-page ruling that declared the magazine ban unconstitutional, wrote, “People may cede liberty to their government in exchange for the promise of safety. Or government may gain compliance from its people by forcibly disarming all. In the United States, the Second Amendment takes the legislative experiment off the table. Regardless of current popularity, neither a legislature nor voters may trench on constitutional rights. An unconstitutional statute adopted by a dozen jurisdictions is no less unconstitutional by virtue of its popularity.”
Correction: I-1639 passed in 14 Washington counties but failed in the rest.
Several weeks ago, Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich told Liberty Park Press that he had received hundreds of phone calls, including many from people who voted for the initiative, expressing alarm and surprise at what the measure actually required. At the time, he said many people felt they had been misled into believing the initiative was about school safety, but it is really a gun control measure.
Some 20 county sheriffs, including Knezovich, have announced they won’t enforce provisions of the initiative.
The Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association are partnered in a federal lawsuit against the measure,
And over the past two months, WAC members have donated more than $13,000 to help pay the legal expenses to fight the initiative.
Gov. Jay Inslee—who is currently running last in a race for the Democratic nomination for president—and Attorney General Bob Ferguson have warned sheriffs about possible liability for not enforcing the initiative’s requirements. Both men supported the initiative and the current insurrection by sheriffs and county governments amounts to an embarrassing political slap in the face.
RELATED:
‘Unenforceable?’ ‘Unconstitutional?’ Fight Heats over WA I-1639
Exclusive: Spokane County Sheriff Rips AG Ferguson, I-1639
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
“As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”
"You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
-
04-08-2019, 03:26 PM
#154
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
“As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”
"You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
-
04-08-2019, 08:02 PM
#155
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
“As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”
"You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
-
04-10-2019, 09:37 AM
#156
How To Start A Fire
April 9, 2019 – 11:41 pm
The House held a hearing on “white nationalism” today. One of the speakers was the conservative black woman Candace Owens, who gave a rousing opening statement. You can watch it here.
The focus on “white nationalism” by the Left has been a clever and effective tactic, one that focuses on the intrinsic nature of the conservative disposition. It is in the nature of that disposition to enjoy a quiet and orderly life, and to take one’s pleasure and fulfillment from that which is. It is therefore almost tautologically true that conservatives are by their very nature not social or political activists; indeed the word “conservative” attaches itself to nothing in particular.
This means that a conservative will be roused to political involvement, in general, only in reaction to that which is threatened — not by any pre-existing agenda for social or political change. If, then, you want to make people of a conservative disposition rise to defend something, the thing to do is attack it. If you want to see them become ardent capitalists, for example, you should go out of your way to attack capitalism. And if, let’s just say, you wished to create a previously nonexistent multitude of white identitarians, the thing you’d want to do would be to attack “whiteness”. You’d do it on TV and in the movies, in books and magazine articles, in political debates — and, most of all, you’d do it in the schools, where you have a captive audience of children and teens wondering what they ought to believe. Suddenly scores of millions of conservatively inclined people, finding themselves accused, for their membership in a class they were simply born into, of the worst sorts of irredeemable social malevolence, will develop a defensive self-awareness, and will begin to stick up for themselves and the things they have created and sustained.
As soon as they’ve begun to do that, of course, you’ve got them right where you want them. Now you can point at this artificially inseminated, newly born identitarianism as being precisely the problem you’ve had your eye on all along, and suggest that it is now “in the open”, and “on the rise”. And you can build your own polyvalent coalition in opposition to it, doing everything you can to make people choose sides — which they will increasingly feel they have to do, as tensions rise and the middle hollows out.
And you should, of course, fan the flames as vigorously as possible throughout — with things like televised congressional hearings.
Matt Bracken says
The Left is trying to use their old Jacobin/Marxist/Alynskeyite playbooks, and target heritage white Americans “white nationalist” virtual neo-nazis as their contemporary scapegoats, but all they will do is instigate a brutal civil war that they will lose.
“Covington Gives a Glimpse of CW2”
/snip/ “…before every notorious genocide, the same pattern of marginalizing and demonizing a designated scapegoat population has occurred. On the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, the national mainstream media signaled that it was now acceptable to vent seething racial hatred against white males, even teenage boys. This was further telegraphed when notable verified Twitter blue-check accounts were not suspended after doxing the boys and posting explicit calls for violence against them. (By way of contrast, I was permanently banned from Twitter for posting an anti-burka meme that did not even name a religion.)
“The Covington confrontation points to an ironclad historical pattern. Every previous genocide in modern times was preceded by a similar pattern of public demonization of state-designated scapegoats. But is correlation causation? Does the American Left intend to eventually commit genocide against white heritage American males? In my opinion, yes. Scapegoating is part of a clear pattern of conduct seen during every socialist power grab from the French Revolution until now. In the case of German national socialists, European Jews were the scapegoats of the Nazis during their climb to power. In the case of international socialists, AKA Communists, class enemies were usually but not always the designated scapegoats. Examples of class enemies would include the Kulaks in the Soviet Union, “landlords” in China, and “intellectuals” in Cambodia. But in other cases ethnic groups were targeted as scapegoats by Communists, to include the Ukrainians, Crimeans, Latvians and others.
“So, are today’s Democrats already planning to load their white heritage American enemies into boxcars for trips to a new Gulag? Probably not many at this time, but Barack Obama’s political mentor Bill Ayers certainly considered it. Ayers believed that so many Americans would bitterly resist Communism that 25 million would have to be “eliminated”.”
https://www.americanpartisan.org/201...civil-war-two/
Posted April 10, 2019 at 9:03 am | Permalink
-
04-11-2019, 10:47 AM
#157
"The zeitgeist of the country is becoming more apocalyptic by the moment. The left’s never ending claims of white racism while calling for the extermination of white christian males has triggered Middle America into arming itself to the teeth. Numerous pundits are pushing the civil war meme from the left, the right and the middle. The country has politically divided along geographic lines. The urban centers have embraced black and hispanic racism. Whites have fled to urban counties surrounding these population centers. As a result of this white flight, the country has split between urban and rural.
The grand game of thrones has been centered on controlling the flow of oil for the last half century. The United States has become a major oil producing nation in the last few years. That production has attracted international attention. There should be no question in anyone’s mind that igniting a civil war in the United States would serve the interests of both China and Russia. Should the U.S. tear itself apart, foreign nationals would be more than willing to send peace keeping forces to occupy our oil fields. The Chinese have infiltrated our technology to the point that Chinese components are present in most of our security and military systems. To assume that these components do not allow the Chinese access to these systems is hubris. To assume they are not using elements of our own government against us is also hubris.
What makes things different this time is the changed American demographic. During the Revolution, which was in fact America’s first civil war, and during the Civil War, the dominant demographic was WASP. Blacks and Indians were minor players in both those wars. The outcomes were driven by WASP values.
If we look at Mexico during its war for independence, we find a more varied demographic. Based on the 1793 census, there were 8,000 Europeans, 700,000 criollos, native born whites, 420,000 mestizos, 360,000 mulatos, 6000 blacks, and 2,300,000 Indians. When the revolution started, it triggered a race war and a class war along with the push for independence. The war shattered Mexican institutions to include the government, banking systems, the church, the industrial and mining sector and the agricultural sector. The nation’s economy and the legitimacy of its institutions were destroyed. Roughly ten percent of the population died from the war and the resulting famine. The country’s political instability made it easy prey for foreign aggressors. Mexico declined and stagnated as a direct result of its revolution.
Source: Down From Colonialism, Jamie E, Rodriguez, Chicano Studies Center Publications, UCLA, 1983.
America is not the same country it was in 1860. We are totally dependent on thousand mile long supply chains and just in time delivery systems. We have an extremely fragile grid that is subject to failure in the best of times. Multiculturalism is not a strength during periods of social and economic collapse. Racial factions coalesce into warring tribes that slaughter each other. These warring tribes will take down the grid, shatter our political and religious institutions and open the country to foreign occupation."
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
“As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”
"You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
-
04-11-2019, 03:36 PM
#158
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
“As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”
"You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
-
04-11-2019, 04:31 PM
#159
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
“As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”
"You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
-
04-12-2019, 04:56 PM
#160
Watch Live: Three Hate Crimes In One Day Against Trump Supporters Ignored By MSM
The establishment wants to shut down Infowars because we cover the news they’re afraid to touch
Owen Shroyer | Infowars.com - April 12, 2019
https://www.infowars.com/three-hate-...gnored-by-msm/
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
“As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”
"You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules