Read up on the Lincoln and Woodrow Wilson presidencies, and then come back and tell us if you still think you’re suffering under a “tyranny” now.
Did we pass the tranny test? Oh wait… :help:
Are you actually trying to compare states of tyranny to justify the current state of tyranny?
Hadn’t heard of Florida doing it, just New London, CT doing it for Pfizer. No benefit came about, still a vacant lot.
I’m not sure anyone has a perfect answer to that question, but the first step almost certainly should be getting our s**t in order and getting organized on multiple levels. Starting with those like minded individuals closest to you, and branching outward. No one here, even the baddest among us, is going to make any kind of measurable difference alone. We need numbers, we need organization. Before that can happen though, we really need to define what “we” is.
Also, as much as it’s hard to admit, guns are a whole lot less effective in the war we find ourselves in now. Maybe that all plays a part later. Who knows? Right now though, we’re in the middle of an information war and we’re loosing badly. I’m not convinced it isn’t already too late on that front.
Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
That’s really neat.
…
“Neat”? I’m overwhelm, hold on while I catch my breath.
John’s a nice guy, but like so many American Christians, seems to have forgotten doctrinal history before American came into existence.
It was a dismissal. No need to keep on.
Yeah, Willie I got that. Right back at ya Mr. Law of the Land.
Exactly my broader point.
Or, current day, the fact that the state regulators where never met with angry gangs of shopkeepers ready to toss them out any time they showed up to cite/fine a business for some arbitrary Covid mandate.
Ah yes… the penultimate “well what are you doing then?” argument rears its head yet again…
Well… back at ya.
Essentially that argument insinuates the speaker has a better plan, or is already doing something more effective. Share with the class then.
But I’ll answer the question anyway:
Because I’m not an idiot, and right now the best thing, given current enemy actions, is to do nothing (except the oft repeated organize/buy/plan).
“Never interrupt the enemy when they are in the middle of making a mistake”. Remember the ‘CHAZ’?
Rogue556 made some good points as well, although I suspect any serious organization will be a very late-game thing (if ever); you’ll always be the bad guy, even to your erstwhile allies. IT will be up to everyone as an individual to decide what level of response they are going to take, for their own reasons. No, it likely won’t accomplish anything measurable right then and there, but neither will doing nothing. Like I said in the other thread, I think the reason why this is all such a meme-driven thing is most people have grasped good and well there is no greater cause to support, just what the individual is willing to put up with and for how long.
“The Streets”/mass action are for people with a movement and some level of public opinion behind them, and we have neither.
We can point to episodes of government abuse going unchecked, like Steyr’s example, or the Branch Davidians, but not much talk about Cliven Bundy. I don’t even know how all that ended up. I just know that the feds, at least at one point, backed off. Then we see what Timothy McVeigh decided to do about it all…
Which “Bundy Event”? The famous “bridge standoff” thing over the Fed/BLM actions ended with a net win, the Malheur thing… kind of a shitshow all around, feds/popo shot one guy (Lavoy), sort of a net draw. As far as the Bundy’s as a whole, IIRC there is still some stuff going on with them, that I’ve not kept up with.
Mcveigh was a dipshit and probably a patsy. I don’t count that event as anyone ‘deciding to do something’. “Killdozer” would be a more apt example.
Seems you are looking for a theocracy. Otherwise if simply being “religious” trumps “mans law” than what protects us from sharia becoming the law of the land simply because enough muslims decide allahs law supersedes everything else.
Sadly for you I don’t think a christian theocracy currently exists anywhere in the world and when we did have one it didn’t go very well and I hope that isn’t your vision for a perfect world of gods law. You can sort of do the judeo part of judeo christian in Israel, but I think you’d be disappointed. Maybe if you and enough fundamentalists could get together you could go all ZION or would it be Xtian on some vulnerable piece of middle eastern real estate and raise the Jesus flag.
I’d personally recommend Cyprus. Kick out the Turks and you would be good to go, the Greeks should be heavily Greek Orthodox so no real conflict there.
True, but the comeback for that is in keeping with his warning… He hasn’t been arrested, and sent to a reeducation camp… SO FAR.
The point he’s trying to make, and that I, (probably you) and so many others agree with, is that this is the goal they are working towards.
I’m positive they look forward to the day when they can just disappear people who become a thorn in their side.
I personally think that the only thing stopping them from doing such at this very moment is that they feel they haven’t quite demonized us enough so that they feel they would have sufficient support for such actions were images of them leak out to the public.
He has been very clear about that being his preference.
Nope, his group is a schism of a schism, and the Orthodox would not get along.
Tyranny isn’t the problem.
It’s a total change of society.
Remember, AT THE TIME everybody was gleefully kissing Lenin and Hitler’s asses when only a very few people were saying “Hey wait I don’t know about this”. They got the 1917 and 1929 equivalent of “Okay Boomer”.
I mean, you’re all looking for the head. There is no head. Look at the society. You’re all already on the outskirts as is.
It takes people to give a tyrant his power. A lot of people. A lot of corporatism. A lot of minarchy.
Mr. Lovell is looking for the guy in the Van Dyke or the Uniform. I’m looking at what the neighborhood is listening to and advocating.
The music, the art, what passes for scholastic merit.
Ever read the original book I Am Legend?
I wish I never read it so I could read it blind again for the first time. It was deliciously subversive social satire. It was Dawn of the Dead 78 before Dawn of the Dead.
The ending is where you all are. To the current society, you aren’t heroes. You’re all crazy white guys with guns pushing dead religions or non-feasible social order.
I would put money on, if you were to sit down with John and discuss this topic, you and he (and I) would agree on 99% of what you believe.
Although I’m not sure even that is good enough for you. You seem to like throwing the baby out with the bath water so…
Agreed. Everyone cares too much about “looking like the bad guy”. That’s why nothing really gets done on “our” side except for posturing and drawing a so called line in the sand, then redrawing a line a little farther back from the real one every time it moves.
“We” all forget that ultimately the winners determines how the winners look like, no matter how they really look or what they did. The left knows this and carries out there “operations” with that mind set. We know they are fascists, the ones in charge know they are fascists…they just don’t care, because in the end, if they win, they are not.
I am not sure if and when “our” side will play by the same rules and mindset, but if we don’t, we will be the losers. Like it or not.
Maybe, because of our fallenness there will always be disagreement on something, hopefully minor. It’s the big doctrines that we need to agree on, but generally whatever form of Christianity we gravitate to because of our doctrinal beliefs, that is going to determine whether we could have an on going communion. From my point of view the fatal flaws and anti-Christian principles in the Constitution are such that I could never willing submit to it. I doubt that you or John would agree, that’s a big big disagreement that can’t be bridged. It doesn’t mean that I think that others that disagree with me on this or other issues are not Christians.
We would call it historic theonomy. Think of ancient Israel in the days of David. There was one religion authorized, the people understood that and practiced it. It was overseen by the faithful priests. You couldn’t open a Baal temple down the street from God’s temple. David was the king, he was the magistrate. He didn’t perform the religious services at the temple and priests didn’t legislate. But they did work together for the good of the kingdom and the people. They were separate in their duties, but not in some absolute way. Theocracy is different in that the men in charge of the religion are also in charge of the gov’t, there is no separation at all. Law is always based on someone’s idea of right and wrong. European and then U.S. law was based on a developing understanding of biblical moral law at one time, although there was much intermingling of the mere opinions of men. The divine right of kings being one of those mere opinions of men that violated divine law and had to be reformed. You may think that Biblical law is somehow equivalent to Sharia, but I don’t. The U.S. is essentially a religiously pluralistic state, recognizing many religions as somehow valid. It also functions in a more, more atheistic way. The Democrats are functioning as atheists, even though they give lip service to “God”. Joes a good Catholic all the while he does everything he can to further abortion. This country is fragmenting more and more because there is no more shared values amongst it’s people. In religion, in what gov’t should and shouldn’t do, in the concept of rights, and economics. More and more we believe completely different things. Maybe it’s pluralism that doesn’t work very well. Historic theonomy has existed in the past and I believe someday it will exist in the vast majority of the world. If everyone believed and lived by the 10 commandments, would things be better or worst. Any Christian would know the answer.
Actually historic theonomy was instituted in the days of King David by God himself. It was also a developing religion/political system that was taken very seriously in Europe during the protestant reformation. They believed in the absolute validity of divine moral law and how it should shape politics. At one time England, Ireland, and Scotland held to the same terms of communion and view of the gov’t that I hold to now. Although they held to monarchial form of gov’t, I don’t. Monarchy isn’t absolutely necessary biblically. Who really are the schismatics? Since there is an almost complete rejection of biblical law in the world today and even in this country…how’s that working out for all of us? Since we like to talk about the 2nd amendment here, where did that right come from? Atheists? Roman pagans? Mohamed? That’s right, it came from the bible.