Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

All the articles in this series may be found by entering “guns and liberty, 2021” into the SMM homepage search bar.

The first four articles in this series dealt with issues of philosophy, morality and theology. It is now time to delve into issues far less lofty and divine, issues fought in the muddy and fetid fever swamps of Washington D.C., which was, ironically, built on swampy ground. As we have already established the right to self-defense is a fundamental, unalienable right, a right not granted by government, a right which may not be lawfully infringed or taken away by government, it may seem odd to have to deal with politics in regard to that right, but such is the nature of man.

It is not widely known that a substantial number of the Founding Fathers did not want a Bill of Rights, while others would not sign or assist in the ratification of the Constitution without a solemn understanding that the Bill of Rights would follow in short order.  They were afraid future generations of politicians would claim that rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights were the only rights of citizens.  As it turns out, they were prescient in this and much else.

Gun control has always been an issue fraught with political intrigue, and reasonably so, for an armed society is a free society.  No dictatorship can allow its subjects the freedom to keep and bear arms, as they will inevitably be driven to use them against the dictator and his—or her–thugs. Dictators, in consolidating power and control over their populations, always deprive them of arms, commonly through the mass application of deadly force.  Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, all have followed this common pattern, as have all dictatorships before them.  Free men wisely look upon restrictions on firearm ownership and use with a jealous and wary eye, for history warns them of the inevitable dangers and depredations that inevitably follow.

James Madison
Credit: wikipedia.org

James Madison, writing as“Publius” in the Federalist #46, clearly understood this political reality and the dark nature of human beings grasping for ultimate power over others:

Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.

In Madison’s time, the militia were the people–all men of military age–who would band together when necessary, bringing their own weapons and other equipment, to overthrow a tyrannical government.  The Founders, from experience, were wary of standing armies.  Madison obviously recognized the individual ownership of arms as a powerful deterrent to would-be tyrants. Notice in Madison’s prose there is no mention of self-defense, hunting or sport shooting. The primary purpose of the Second Amendment is the deterrence, and if necessary the abolishment, of tyranny in defense of individual liberty.

credit: owlsandorchids.com

The historical record is more than clear, as the Supreme Court justly observed in its Heller (2008) decision, followed by the McDonald (2010)  decision, which applied Heller to the states.

Yet contemporary would-be tyrants hate the Second Amendment, and never stop trying to destroy it, bit by bit. Hillary Clinton, in her failed presidential bid, actually ran on nullifying Heller, though she danced around such obvious language. Her daughter, Chelsea, assured Democrats/Socialists/Communists Hillary would work for gun control every day.   Armed citizens frighten would be despots, as well they should.

Barack Obama’s major 2013 anti-gun push was a spectacular failure. Most congressional democrats did not dare support him.  Circa 2020, this changed, particularly in the D/S/C controlled House, yet they achieved no real success.  Draconian and surely unconstitutional anti-gun laws have been adopted in New York State, Connecticut, Maryland, California, and are under consideration in Virginia and elsewhere.  Congressional D/S/Cs, emboldened by the fraudulent election of Kamala Harris and the increasingly senile placeholder, Joe Biden, are openly bragging about their anti-liberty/gun intentions, and promising to implement them on “day one.”

Tyrants rely on “the banality of evil,” a term coined in Hannah Arendt’s 1963 book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil.  The book is based on the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolph Eichmann.  Arendt observed that Eichmann was not a deranged monster, but an ordinary, efficient bureaucrat that willingly accepted the mandates of the state, including murdering millions of innocents, including many fellow Germans.

But if a D/S/C government tried to seize privately owned arms, federal employees would not go along.  Anyone thinking that is sadly, tragically mistaken in ways that would lead to their deaths and the deaths of millions of law abiding Americans. Many federal agents, perhaps most, would not take up arms against their fellow Americans, but enough would. It’s human nature.  Madison understood this, and so must we.

Anyone wishing to learn how such a conflict would likely play out need only read Stephen Coonts’ Liberty’s Last Stand.   Or Kurt Schlichter’s five-book series about the division of America into red and blue nations (a 6th book is due in 2021).  One should begin with the first book, People’s Republic.

Attempts to seize citizen’s guns might very well be the spark that ignites a second civil war. There are very real and direct benefits in prestige, power, creature comforts, and domination over others for men and women willing to oppress, beat, torture and kill their fellow citizens. As long as they enjoy a monopoly on the means of applying force, they maintain those benefits, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. In such tyrannies, once the line is crossed, there is no going back, for not only will the state gladly murder a formerly loyal agent that suddenly develops a conscience, so too will their colleagues and their victims.Mr. Obama, like a good narcissistic Socialist, was undaunted.  During his 2014 State of the Union speech, he swore to use his pen and phone to pass gun control measures, measures that he could not obtain constitutionally, though the legislative process in the Congress. In his final two months of dictatorial power, he used executive orders, just as his weaponized agencies used rule making to impose a blizzard of tyrannical, unconstitutional measures, and to illegally spy on, persecute and prosecute innocent Americans, including President Trump.  Obama said:

I intend to keep trying, with or without Congress, to help stop more tragedies from visiting innocent Americans in our movie theaters, shopping malls, or schools like Sandy Hook.’

Obama also said:

‘Citizenship means standing up for the lives that gun violence steals from us each day,’ he continued. ‘I have seen the courage of parents, students, pastors, and police officers all over this country who say ‘we are not afraid.

None of the measures Mr. Obama tried to pass would have, in any way, stopped the crimes he cited, nor would they today.  Such laws only inconvenience and criminalize the law-abiding.  And of course, the fact that Mr. Obama–-the head of what is surely the most lawless administration in history–-regularly bypassed the Constitution to work his will, was a matter of no small concern to normal Americans.

Mr. Obama worked to legalize millions of illegal immigrants, thus throwing open the border floodgates to millions more.  President Trump reestablished enforcement of immigration law, but Harris/Biden promise to throw open the borders.  The necessity of keeping and bearing arms against a tide of criminals–and I speak not of the honest man or woman merely seeking a better life for their family–can’t be denied. The perverse evil of Mr. Obama’s government, the governments of blue state governors, and congressional D/S/Cs in trying to disarm Americans in the face of this threat, and the never-ending threats of terrorism and domestic crime, likewise cannot be denied. Their enabling of vicious criminals, racists and anarchists while simultaneously crippling our police forces has made America a much more dangerous place.

Circa 2021, George Soros sponsored prosecutors and politicians are going far beyond the damage of the Obama years, abolishing bail, releasing violent felons from prison and refusing to prosecute most crimes, including crimes of violence.  Crying “white supremacy” and “systemic racism,” they and Harris and Biden, promise to establish a system of “social justice” where race determines prosecution, not law breaking.  No wonder gun purchase records have been set in the last year–women and Black people are the largest groups of new purchasers—and continue apace.

That elected representatives should even think to propose laws that are so clearly unconstitutional, so counter to the very foundations of liberty, and that they should see their law-abiding countrymen as threats, should be alarming to all free men that wish to remain free.  I’ll not broach the subject of First Amendment threats here, but they are of a piece with attacks on the Second Amendment.

Before I go further, a brief political primer might be useful.  Generally, American Conservatives/normal Americans, are supportive of the Second Amendment and D/S/Cs are not.  I’ll use that acronym, as many Democrats no longer like to be associated with the term “Liberal” or even “Progressive.  Too many Americans have come to associate those terms with actual Democrat policies and intentions.  Circa 2021, a Democrat Party dedicated to American constitutionalism no longer exists.  The goals and policies of the contemporary D/S/C Party have become virtually indistinguishable from Socialist, or even Marxist, orthodoxy. Democrat, Progressive, Statist, Socialist, Communist, all are slightly different shades of the American left, and virtually all despise firearms and their possession by free men.  Actually, they despise America and all Americans that honor the Constitution, some half of America.

For those familiar with the general philosophies of the respective political movements, this is to be expected and is a natural consequence of those beliefs.  Few political differences more clearly delineate and illuminate the philosophies and intentions of Conservatives–normal Americans–and D/S/Cs than their respective views on the Second Amendment.  Keep in mind this primer is, of necessity, brief and a generalization being painted with a rather broad brush.

H&K MP5 Submachine Gun

D/S/C Philosophy: D/S/Cs are fundamentally concerned with equality of outcome.  During a 2008 debate, Mr. Obama asserted  that he would raise capital gains taxes even if doing so produced less tax revenue (as historically has been the case) because it would be “fair” to make ostensibly wealthier people pay more.  The new self-described “Boss” of the D/S/C Party, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, has advocated a 70% or higher tax rate on the “wealthy”–whoever they might be–because they’re not paying enough taxes, despite the fact that the fiscal top 1% of Americans pay 37% of all taxes, and the top 10% pay 70% of all taxes.  Remember that some 46% of American households paid no federal income tax in 2011, and the same is true today.  For D/S/Cs, the definition of “rich” is quite flexible, and given free reign, they would dramatically raise taxes on people not remotely wealthy—all indications are Harris/Biden plan to do just that–because that’s where the money really is.

This has been made absolutely clear by Obamacare, which was, from the very beginning, a vehicle for the absolute control of the population, and for the redistribution of wealth.  D/S/Cs promise to infuse it with steroids.  If D/S/Cs succeed in eliminating the private insurance market and mandating “medicare for all” or “single payer health care”—which they very much want to do–they will be very close to absolute rule.  The government that giveth, also, inevitably, taketh away, and for it’s own purposes having nothing to do with the welfare of the individual, particularly the individual not sufficiently supportive of the government.

All of this is perfectly predictable because it reflects the D/S/C preoccupation with equality of outcome.  In other words, in the name of “equity,” everyone should have the same things: food, housing, medical care, conveniences, etc.  That not everyone is willing to work for these things matters not.  Perhaps the most commonly known aphorism relating to this concept is the Marxist “from each according to his abilities; to each according to his needs.”  As a general, superficial, statement of “fairness,” it seems almost reasonable.  However, like so much of D/S/C philosophy, it ignores the realities of human nature.  Notice too that “equity” is nebulous; it means nothing and everything.  It also has the very salutatory benefit of allowing its user to conceal his true intentions.  Who, after all, opposes “fairness?”

D/S/C philosophy by nature demands big government and absolute governmental power.  This flows from the fundamental D/S/C belief that man is perfectible, or at the very least can be forced to behave–even think–in approved ways.  Only morally and intellectually superior, self-imagined elite scientific D/S/Cs are sufficiently evolved to keep everyone on the straight path of Socialism where utopia will be established, and perfect social justice will reign under their enlightened and benevolent rule.  Normal Americans are untrustworthy God and gun clingers, homophobic, racist, sexist, unconcerned about the environment and “social justice.”

It falls to the scientific D/S/C to force their less evolved brethren to better themselves, shut up entirely or mouth the right platitudes.  If only government becomes large enough, if only the right laws and regulations are written and enforced (and there will never be enough, for the process of perfection is never-ending), if only the God and gun clingers can be disarmed so they have no choice but to obey, only then can man be perfected despite himself.

Socialism is non-falsifiable, it can never be wrong, for if it appears to fail, this means insufficient Socialism has been applied, not enough money has been spent (sound familiar?), normal Americans have been allowed to exist to oppose it (in a tyranny that has deprived peasants of arms, this is a lesser problem as they can more efficiently be oppressed or killed), or it has not had sufficient time to work its miracles of transformation.

It was Barack Obama in 2008 who repeatedly swore to “fundamentally transform” America.  Circa 2020, soon to be Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer swore if D/S/Cs took the Senate, they would not only transform America, but the World.  Congressional D/S/Cs have not only impeached President Trump again, they’re supporting the elimination of the First Amendment, and calling for the ouster of Congressional Republicans that dare oppose them.  They too are promising “fundamental transformation.”  Contemporary D/S/Cs have, for the most part, abandoned any attempt at normal, political stealth, and are aggressively announcing their true intentions.  If realized, they will greatly surpass Barack Obama’s bypassing of the Constitution.

This is a gross violation of federal law; Gropin’s Joe’s idea of unity…

Any philosophy that demands big and ever-enlarging government must of necessity support high and ever-increasing taxes.  Taxes can never be high enough, and must be imposed based on “equity”–whatever the elite choose to define as “fair” at the moment, which circa 2021 seems to disfavor white and middle class Americans–-rather than a rational scheme of necessity.  In practice, this means taxes will always be highest on those D/S/Cs disfavor, such as the wrong kind of wealthy and/or normal Americans that oppose them. D/S/Cs are obsessed with class warfare. Pitting Americans against each other is one of their primary tactics, hence their current obsession with race.

D/S/Cs are, at best, unsure of the existence of evil.  Good is faithful adherence to Socialist doctrine and the goals of the state, but overt recognition of evil would require the admission that evil cannot be controlled by Socialism, that there is a greater power than themselves, hence evil must be understood as resistance to Socialism.

Unsurprisingly, many D/S/Cs are irreligious at best, and generally hostile to any expression of faith. This is also commonly demonstrated in the writings of the Legacy Media which is irredeemably Socialist, no longer bothering to pretend to be unbiased.  D/S/Cs commonly depict people of faith as fools, dupes, or dangerous lunatics seeking to impose their religious superstitions on all.

D/S/Cs often reserve their greatest hatred and venom for those that oppose their policies.  This is in large part why normal Americans trying earnestly to discuss policy with D/S/Cs often find themselves on the receiving end of violently angry and irrational verbal assaults and name calling, “racist” being a contemporary favorite, followed closely by “gun nut,” “nazi,” “murderer,” “climate/science denier,” and other choice bits of invective.

For Socialism to flourish, the state must always take primacy over the individual.  The state’s powers are absolute, and the people have no rights, only the privileges accorded them by current state policies and preferences.  Despite continual lip service to “equality,” “diversity, “fairness” and the welfare of “the people,” there is no rule of law under Socialism, no equal treatment under the law, only social justice where some animals are more equal than others.  Diversity is a euphemism for conformity, and so is “unity.”  The state, which has no morality, no conscience, cares nothing for any individual, only the abstraction that is “the people,” and only to the degree that abstraction is politically useful at the moment.

As the 2020 election cycle conclusively demonstrated, the minions of the legacy media are nothing more than D/S/C operatives with bylines. The media did everything it could to excoriate Donald Trump and elect Kamala Harris, utterly abandoning any pretense of professional, unbiased journalism.

Kriss Super V .45 ACP Submachine Gun

This is why D/S/Cs absolutely oppose self-defense and the means to secure it. Recognizing the fundamental, unalienable right to keep and bear arms is a tacit admission the law-abiding individual is sovereign, and has supremacy over the state. A state forced to recognize the natural rights, and the rights of the individual under the rule of law, admits the individual and the rule of law are more powerful than the whims of the state. The admission that government derives its powers entirely from the people is toxic to despots. No tyrant can abide it.

D/S/Cs support collective rather than individual responsibility, and embrace victimhood.  If one is poor–for instance–it must be because they are black, female, illegal immigrants, the education system has failed them, society has failed them and/or someone or something is oppressing them. This is particularly true of certain constituencies that slavishly support D/S/C policies in return for governmental largess.  Members of favored victim groups bear no individual responsibility for their behavior or circumstances, and all right-minded people are endangered by anyone that believes the Second Amendment means what it says and says what it means, and the greatest danger is, of course, the NRA.

D/S/Cs crave governmental power.  To that end, power can never be granted by “the people,” but comes from the will of the self-imagined elite. D/S/Cs fear arms in the hands of the people, and always do whatever they can to disarm them.  Among the most severely punished crimes in Socialist societies—even Great Britain–-are those involving citizen possession or use of arms.  The possession of arms by citizens is an ever-present threat to the very existence of Socialism, and D/S/Cs never cease their efforts to achieve total citizen disarmament.  The D/S/C party has always been at the forefront of gun control efforts, particularly in support of segregation.  Gun control has its roots in the most evil expressions of racism. Historian Clayton Cramer’s essay “The Racist Roots of Gun Control,” should be required reading in every school in America.

Because they believe no right to self-defense exists, the means to exercise self-defense are illegitimate and must be taken from the law abiding. Ironically, D/S/Cs commonly hate and despise the Police, seeing them as stupid, racist brutes and oppressors who must be defunded or abolished, but recognize their social utility only when they keep D/S/Cs in power.  Note their new-found love of the Capital police.  As I’ve noted in previous articles, the police—even in our representative republic—have no obligation to protect any individual.  In a Socialist state, the police are required to actively play favorites, which never includes the law-abiding.

Why would D/S/Cs favor criminals, even terrorists?  Why did they support and encourage the anarchists that burned cities run by their own kind during “the summer of love”?  It takes little effort to find thousands of contemporary examples of what rational people would find amazing, inexplicable affection for and support of the worst elements of society.  The politicians of New York State—and other states–have done away with bail, unleashing criminals to prey on the law-abiding.  While some part of this may be nothing more than a perverse tendency to reflexively oppose the values of those they hate–-the normal American God and gun clingers of Flyover Country–-simply put, criminals and terrorists commonly share D/S/C views and goals.  They oppose individual liberty but support Socialism, because it gives them maximum freedom to work their wills, and accept the praise and support of D/S/Cs who tend to see them as oppressed victims of normal society, and/or anarchic forces useful in keeping Normals in a state of fearful chaos and so less likely to actively oppose D/S/C government.

Most importantly, criminals, who D/S/Cs virtually never try to disarm, overwhelmingly vote for the D/S/Cs that make their lives so very much easier, which is also why they seek to secure the vote for convicted felons in and out of prison.

Next week: the continuation of the political differences between D/S/Cs and Normal Americans and why they define the American gun debate. I hope to see you again next Tuesday.