Comments: Understanding The Fear Of Self-Defense And Revolution

This is true, as far as it goes, but there's more to it than the writer is aware of or willing to admit.

The character of the people matters significantly in this equasion, and its why the founding fathers repeatedly warned that the only way a republic can survive is if its people are virtuous. This was a lesson hard learned in Rome, and we're seeing again today.

It doesn't matter how vigorously you defend the country, if the large majority of the people prefer comfort and ease over liberty. The government of a republic reflect its people, their character. So it doesn't really matter what sort of revolution you hold, all you'll get is the same or worse unless the people change at a fundamental level.

Posted by Christopher Taylor at February 14, 2015 10:17 AM

Unfortunately when you hire someone to watch over you you must watch over him endlessly and most people cannot be bothered, I mean, what's the point? That's why you hired him in the first place!

The only cure is to not allow someone else's fears rule you. The moment they attempt to rule you you must take matters into hand, severely and if you are unwilling to do so then what you have right now is the result.

When the founders created the chains that now bind us they should have all been killed on the spot before they left the hall.

No one gets to speak for me.

Posted by ghostsniper at February 14, 2015 2:17 PM

Kill anybody you have to ... as soon as you need to.

Posted by chasmatic at February 15, 2015 2:07 PM

In spite of all voices desiring otherwise, man is a social animal. From huddling in caves, fearing thunder, to huddling in cities, fearing mau-mauing minorities, people look for leaders to 'save' them from the bogyman, who actually is that bogyman.

Posted by Vermont Woodchuck at April 20, 2015 5:41 AM

Most of us probably get along fine with people we see, in person, on a regular basis. People at a distance, that we cannot address directly in person, are a problem.

Posted by ghostsniper at April 20, 2015 8:11 AM

Fidarsi è bene ma non fidarsi è meglio.

To trust is good but not to trust is better.

Posted by chasmatic at April 21, 2015 12:01 AM

We're all dancing around the point of this one. We ought to be addressing the basic question which I see as: where do you draw the line and when do you use whatever force you have to keep what you have?

"... not to commit murder. You understand the distinction? Not to kill someone to take a life, but only to save my own.”

Posted by chasmatic at April 21, 2015 8:12 AM

"because the “real problem” is the corrupt nature of humanity in general and that if we remove one set of elites, they will simply be replaced with another set, as if society is fatally predisposed to develop an elitist class."


LUKE 14

34 Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be seasoned?

35 It is neither fit for the land, nor yet for the dunghill; but men cast it out. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Everything rots. The rot will always be there, trying to corrupt.
We need to continue being the salt or it all will go completely rotten.

"Here I stand; I can do no other. God help me. Amen!"
~Martin Luther

Posted by Speller at April 21, 2015 8:50 AM

Post a comment




Remember me?

(You may use HTML tags for style)