438 Comments

The main reason the US did not see the violent police suppression of lockdown dissenters that was seen in Canada, Australia, the Netherlands, etc. is specifically due to local police control. By and large, municipal police and county sheriff's said from the start they would not enforce onerous dictates and instead would rely on "education" (whatever that means). There were some exceptions but they were the outliers.

Bottom line is that it was pretty rare to see people carted off in cuffs for going to park or not wearing a mask in the US. This was not the case in many other so-called western democracies where even departments that appear municipal in their name are actually controlled at the state or national level.

This is the end goal of "defund the police" IMO. It's not to get rid of all police but those that are locally accountable. Of course they will be replaced with police controlled at the state or more likely federal level.

Expand full comment

Agree. There is a whole lot 'they' would like to do but can't as long as citizens are armed. Our second amendment is the only thing holding back a full on attempt at control. Thanks.

Expand full comment

Yes, all of it.

Something that struck me quite powerfully about one of our friend Yuri's posts was the relationship between compulsory national service and those "rooftop Koreans" who knew exactly what to do when circumstances demanded, and how to do it well.

Taking masculinity out of the boy was the real priming of the weapon, wasn't it? Everything going forward depended on that.

Expand full comment

As an old anti-communist I don’t believe that either Marxism/Bolshevism or Fascism/Nazism explain our situation well enough. Both Communism and Fascism are totalitarian in nature but this totalitarianism is fundamentally different. Sheldon Wolin called it inverted totalitarianism for some good reasons. Both Communist and Fascist totalitarianisms are rooted in the idea that political sphere predominates (single party dictatorship) with a strong ‘leader" in charge. In our totalitarianism the political sphere is utterly subverted by the economic forces. There is no single party with a strong leader. Our presidents aren’t “leaders”; that must be painfully obvious to all. They are puppets of forces behind the curtains. This system borrows widely from the other totalitarianisms but it also innovates. Bolsheviks did not replace generals with political hacks, but introduced political commissars to enforce the “party discipline". Stalin did have military purges and some incompetents may have replaced competent generals, but that was not intent of his purges; Stalin feared popular and competent generals as potential competitors. Bolsheviks would have never done to their military what ruling forces are doing to ours. The cultural BS is not the end aim, but means of our destruction. Destruction of our culture, civilization, history, family, transcending religious frameworks, military, Constitutional framework,..., of life itself. Neither communists nor fascists would have done these things to themselves. This novel totalitarianism is infinitely worse than either of the historic totalitarianisms and therefore we should not use those to explain our reality. None of that which they are destroying is viewed by them as something to cherish or to at least worth keeping. From people’s perspective they are abandoning us, betraying us, killing us. Their interests have diverged from the interests of the rest of us. In practical terms, they might as well be Aliens!

Expand full comment

Great essay. A slow-motion revolution is going on as the military and big city police departments are being purged aggressively.

I fear that, just as Republican states pushed back for freedom during the Covid madness, Democratic states will act individually to eviscerate the Second Amendment. Illinois just banned 80% arms, unserialized blocks of aluminum or polymer that need to be drilled, milled, and meticulously assembled to form an operating firearm. The lying governor claimed that these "ghost guns" were a scourge in the state. The reality is, of course, that Chicago gangbangers have not the intelligence, skill, or patience to perform the task of completing these guns. Their "ghost guns" are stolen weapons with the serial numbers scratched off.

Democrats will work to ban semi-automatic rifles (ARs/AKs) in their states. They are not the equal of military-grade ARs, but they are the most formidable rifle available to civilians, so they must go. Can't have even the semblance of a fair fight when the SHTF...and that's where this is going.

Expand full comment

Many do not understand how we KNOW what the Founding Fathers meant when they wrote the Bill of Rights. You see they debated, talked and wrote about it and we can read them today. Here is an example from some of the people that actually wrote and voted for the 2nd Amendment:

“The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46.

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."

Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824.

"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials." George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426

"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8

I should also note that if you believe this is a 200 year old out of touch document than by all means we have an Amendment Process that can fix that.

Expand full comment

I agree with the sentiment of this article, which forces me to consider: does anyone else have 2A single issue voter fiends who seem blind to the wider cultural context?

One of mine, in particular, comes to mind. He’s so myopic about gun control that he has no sense of how badly we lose/have lost on every other vector. Ironically, these same losses are what pave the way for further 2A encroachment. It’s odd that he’s so redpilled on guns, but absolutely grill minded in everything else.

Expand full comment

A couple of friends of friends- colonel and above- told me two things recently (this past year)- in a chat over coffee where I began to express my concerns about this exact topic.

1) Unofficially, the US military (at least the Army) COUNTS on a largely armed civilian populace and factors this into their strategic planning for invasion defense. The military does NOT actually consider itself capable of effectively defending the continental US (open on two side with oceans and the other two sides with huge wide porous borders) by itself.

2) A significant portion of brass have had quiet conversations about "If... would we?" and pretty much everyone in these guys' social circles said emphatically "no." You would absolutely have a nontrivial splinter of the military joining whatever the "resistance" looked like, and they would mostly be way more experienced leadership.

I'm not saying nothing you're talking about today is a problem- it is, and it keeps me up at night- but it isn't all bad.

Expand full comment

Purging vax refuseniks is another ideological purification strategy. Vax compilers are way more likely to follow tyrannical orders.

Expand full comment

Here in King County (Seattle), WA, the vaccine mandate/ideological purity test has succeeded in weeding out the 10% of the city and county police force that would think for themselves on this issue. Same with our State Patrol. Conform or be fired. The coopting of police is well underway here.

Expand full comment

Tragically, I lost whatever firearms I may have owned in a tragic bass fishing accident.

Expand full comment

"the capture of justice and investigative/enforcement arms in service of ideology and one sided political partisanship is the road to one party rule. and “brand political foes as terrorists/reactionaries/enemies of the state” is pure bolshevism 101."

We have had uni-party rule and whitewash investigations with rare exceptions like 1976 Church/Pike Committees. Challengers have always been seen as "terrorist threats" and the illusion of fighting to protect Americans more facade than fact but now it has reached absurd, obvious imbalance. It's all true but hardly new just grown so huge it can't be covert.

CIA Family Jewels - Agency Violated Charter for 25 Years, Wiretapped Journalists and Dissidents

June 26, 2007, 1 p.m. - The full "family jewels" report, released today by the Central Intelligence Agency and detailing 25 years of Agency misdeeds, is now available on the Archive's Web site. The 702-page collection was delivered by CIA officers to the Archive at approximately 11:30 this morning -- 15 years after the Archive filed a Freedom of Information request for the documents.

https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB222/

2012 Project Censored - Top Unreported Stories

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has embarked on an unusual approach to ensure that the United States is secure from future terrorist attacks. The agency has developed a network of nearly 15,000 spies to infiltrate various communities in an attempt to uncover terrorist plots. However, these moles are actually assisting and encouraging people to commit crimes. Many informants receive cash rewards of up to $100,000 per case.

https://www.projectcensored.org/4-fbi-agents-responsible-for-majority-of-terrorist-plots-in-the-united-states/

Expand full comment

Just to assist with your technical issue, I too received the email (in full) at 10:06amEDT.

Expand full comment

"i want to be clear here: this is not about self-identity. if you want to see yourself as a man, a woman, a 27 gendered “other,” or an internet cat, knock yourself out. that’s your business. pursue your happiness. i hope you catch it."

No, no, a thousand times no. This is the attitude that brought us to this point. "Just leave us be" turned into "we demand the right to marry" which quickly became "you must bake us a cake". When you let the enemy sneak close to your lines, eventually they will overrun you. It may be true that you can't stop someone from being what they are (or think they are) but what we've done is normalize it. And when society allows the abnormal to become normal all bets are off.

You can be sure that it won't be long before animal lovers will want to marry their horses and brothers and sisters will demand to marry each other. Don't think it will never happen; 40 years ago the idea of men marrying men was unthinkable.

Expand full comment

Come north and save Canada when you've finished up there.

Expand full comment

This started under the Obama administration with the generals.

Expand full comment