Tags

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

Vigilante (noun):  a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily (as when the processes of law are viewed as inadequate).

As regular readers know, in covering the Kyle Rittenhouse case, the media have reached new, nearly unimaginable, lows, previously unplumbed depths of depravity.  Their coverage, in most cases, flew past “wrong” at warp speed directly into maliciously false—they lied.  When a given reporter and/or pundit could, as easily as did I, the author of this scruffy little blog, discover the truth with a few clicks, what’s their excuse for the myriad lies they told, and continue to tell to this day?  When they lie in the service of a narrative that not only would delight in seeing an innocent boy locked up for life without possibility of parole, but directly encourages and fuels riot, arson, looting and the destruction of the social tolerance necessary for civil society to survive, what can we call such commentary, such people, but evil?

Among the lies that will forevermore be told about Kyle Rittenhouse is he was a vigilante.  Democrats/Socialists/Communists–D/S/Cs–know words matter, which is why they always try to coopt them to define the terms of every debate, or most recently, to use them—RACIST! WHITE SUPREMACIST!!—to forestall debate before it occurs: shut up! they explain.  As rational people must agree, the definition of “vigilante” is specific.  In order to qualify, one must “punish crime summarily,” to act as judge, jury and executioner.

That’s not at all what Kyle Rittenhouse and the other armed citizens did.

Also implied is the rule of law remains in force; actual vigilantes ignore it and do as they please.

That wasn’t the case for three nights in August, 2020 in Kenosha, WI.

America has far less of a history of actual vigilantism than conventional wisdom—which is all too often neither–imagines.  With few exceptions, such instances of lynching and similar crimes were committed not by Normal Americans, but by Democrats in defense of slavery, segregation and actual racism.  The Democrat Party has always been the party of slavery and racism.  Circa 2021, the demand for racism and white supremacy greatly exceeds the supply, so D/S/Cs have merely changed tactics and are projecting their intolerance and racism on others.

It is the spiritual, political, descendants of racist, segregationist Democrats that have clamored for the blood of George Zimmerman—archive here—Darren Wilson—archive here—and Kyle Rittenhouse.  It is they, not normal Americans, who have demanded verdict and sentence first, trial later.  It is they who seek to be vigilantes, to act summarily.  Fortunately, in each case, actual reality—facts, evidence and the law—prevailed over social justice, over what D/S/Cs believe ought to be.

I’ll not reiterate in any great detail the facts of the Rittenhouse case—the SMM Rittenhouse archive is here—I’ve done that and am far from done.  Suffice it to say anyone who does not know the facts—the truth—is purposefully ignorant and deceptive.  The purpose of this article is to explore the realities of law and life when government abdicates its primary responsibility: public safety, the maintenance of law and order.  It’s a topic I most recently approached in You’re On Your Own, 2021,  and earlier in Self-Defense In A Reimagined World, in October of 2020.

We have laws that acknowledge and recognize the nature of evil.  Fortunately, few are truly evil, but many, given the opportunity, will do evil things.  Opportunity occurs when the law isn’t enforced or prosecuted.  Opportunity occurs when agitators are paid to travel about the country stirring up trouble.  Most such vermin are D/S/Cs and/or anarchists.  Some are federal agents, notably the FBI and their informants and contract thugs.  These are evil.  Normally peaceful people will do things in mobs they’d never do otherwise, particularly when being masked is required rather than seen as criminal intent.  Covid hysteria has been a windfall for criminal agitators, and their sponsors are loath to do anything to hamper such politically useful criminals, or to relinquish the slightest control over people’s lives.

Let us then, gentle readers, explore the issues arising from the Rittenhouse case.

Rittenhouse, and the other men with guns should not have been there.  No one has the right to take the law into their own hands.

In our representative republic, all governmental power comes from the willing consent of the people.  We elect politicians to handle administrative duties, and to hire police officers to do what we could do if we wished.  The police, members of the executive branch of government, exercise power on loan from us on condition of good behavior.  It is our power; we merely loan it to the police to act on our behalf, to do what we could do, but choose not to do.

What happens when politicians refuse to do their primary duty of public safety?  What happens when they become willing accessories to felonies, encouraging and allowing criminals to loot, rob, assault, murder, burn down significant portions of their communities, destroy lives and decades of labor and love?  What happens when they prevent the police from doing their jobs, when they abandon the people to a racist, D/S/C, Marxist, anarchist mob?

It is no coincidence every thug that tried to kill Kyle Rittenhouse had a lengthy felony record.

Are we truly willing to simply surrender our communities, our neighbors or families to the mercy of those without mercy?  Have we, Americans, the people who bled to abolish slavery, who have at least three times saved the civilized world, become so weak, so fearful?  When the politicians we elect betray us, are we willing to simply abandon our power?  Do we say: “the politicians have become criminals; there’s nothing we can do to protect our property, our community, our lives?”

When the police choose not to enforce the law because they’re reasonably afraid of being fired and/or prosecuted, it’s no different.  When Soros prosecutors refuse to enforce the law, it’s no different.  Law-abiding Americans are abandoned, betrayed, left to fend for themselves.

In so doing, they should obey the law, the law betrayed by their elected and hired employees, but it is their law, their power, and if they abandon it, they cede by default all power to people who have demonstrated they are not worthy of wielding it.  They become complicit in their own subjugation.

Such betrayers of liberty seek to disarm the law-abiding and call any who stand up for their rights, for the power they rightfully possess, domestic terrorists.  Who are the terrorists?  The people who exercise their lawful powers when their employees betray them, who demand government acknowledge and uphold their rights, which politicians and police officers swear to do?  Or do we speak the truth and acknowledge politicians and police who betray the people, who refuse to do their sworn duties are enemies of all Americans?  Do we hold them accountable?

Rittenhouse crossed state lines!

Yes he did.  Americans—free women and men–get to do that and tens of millions do it, even while carrying guns, every day.  There are three likely reasons for this lunatic narrative:

1) It sounds somehow bad, at least to D/S/Cs.  Anyone crossing state lines with an “assault weapon,” must somehow be evil, and already convicted of whatever.  Rittenhouse did not carry any gun across state lines, though if he did it would have been entirely legal, and there is no such thing as an “assault weapon.”

2) It’s an attempt to use federal law to prosecute Rittenhouse and to enact further gun control measures.  The crossing of state lines is often a trigger for federal involvement.  Because Rittenhouse was not acting “under color of law,” there seems no applicable federal statute, but that won’t stop the most weaponized, racist Department of Justice in American history from trying.

3) It has become part of the eternal and false social justice narrative, just as Trayvon Martin was a scholar and pilot who was obviously innocent because he was wearing a hoodie and carrying Skittles, and Michael Brown said “hands up; don’t shoot.”  In the parlance of professional journalists, it’s “fake but accurate.”

But destruction of property isn’t violence.  It’s just reparations for whatever offense rioters and their abettors and apologists claim has afflicted them.  Besides, they have insurance.

Destruction of property, as in damaging or in any way destroying the property of others, is a crime and an offense against civilization.  The protection of private property is another of the primary duties of government, for if we do not have the right to private property and the means to protect it, we live in a state of nature, a Marxist utopia.  This right, is part of the foundation of any free society.  When government betrays that right, all other liberties are shattered.

Destruction of property is always violence.  It does violence to the labor, hopes, dedication and dreams of its owners.  It is an assault on their ability to make a living, to maintain a standard of living.  It is an assault on the public peace, the ability of Americans to live unmolested by crime and hatred.  If we abandon the right to private property, America ends.

The very idea of reparations is a fraud.  It is people who have never suffered deprivation or slavery destroying or stealing the hard-won property of people who have never deprived or enslaved anyone.  There is no justice in that, merely destruction and denial of the contributions of those who have built America and continue to build and maintain it.  It is exalting parasites, takers, people who build and contribute nothing, over those that do.  No society can long survive that.  And of course, it is against the law D/S/Cs pretend to support, but only so long as it is politically convenient.

It was Friedrich Hayek who said:

If socialists understood economics, they wouldn’t be socialists.

A great many small businesses, the businesses D/S/Cs encourage thugs to loot, destroy and burn to the ground, do not have insurance.  Most of those that do are underinsured.  Virtually no one has full replacement insurance.  It’s just too costly, and rampaging inflation—let’s go Brandon!—renders even that irrelevant.  Every insurance payout for a criminally destroyed business increases insurance premiums for every American.  Every piece of merchandise stolen or destroyed increases retail prices for every American.  This is what Hayek meant.  This is real reality.

Insurance is only possible, it only works, when the right to property is unfailingly protected by government.  This D/S/C argument, like so many others, may only be made when the rule of law is in effect, yet they make it as they do all they can to destroy the rule of law.

Anyone carrying a gun openly in public is trying to provoke violence.  They abandon their right to self-defense.

This is not only logical and legal nonsense but moral nonsense.  The Second Amendment does not establish anything.  It merely recognizes the fundamental, unalienable right to self-defense, which is a right inherent in all human beings.  If there is no right to self-defense, if our lives are forfeit to the most violent and evil among us—including corrupt agents of government—what other right matters?  Self-defense is the basis, the beginning, of all rights.

If we have the right to self-defense—D/S/Cs very much want to deny the existence of that right—we also have the right to the means to act upon it, for not everyone is a big, strong, young male.  Even strong and martially experienced men may be overcome by force of numbers.  D/S/C mobs know this; they count on it.

Openly carrying weapons is not only legal, it is an affirmation of our power, our sovereignty, of the reality that every ounce of governmental power comes from the people, who may, when necessary, exercise it themselves or take it back.  If we may keep, but not bear, arms, there is no right to self-defense, and D/S/Cs know it, which is why they never cease to try to limit where arms may be carried and to disarm the law-abiding.

The corrupt Rittenhouse prosecutors lied to the jury.  They claimed anyone openly carrying arms provokes violence and forfeits their right to self-defense.  This is not only legally false, it’s a moral abomination, an affront to the Constitution and to the natural law.  It denies individual sovereignty, the most important, fundamental, unalienable right, and in so doing, exalts evil.

One may argue about the efficacy of concealed versus open carry of arms, but that’s an argument that applies only when the rule of law is in force. For three days in August of 202, the rule of law was suspended in Kenosha, WI, its citizens betrayed by those entrusted to maintain it.

The few brave souls that went openly armed upheld the rule of law.  Despite being unquestionably provoked, they protected businesses and lives.  They did not break any law, and what they protected was not stolen, damaged or burned.  They exercised the power they always had, the power politicians and police abandoned.  They deterred, they did not commit, crimes, just as the police do with the power loaned them, and so should we all.

Anyone who interferes with a mostly peaceful protest is a racist. 

A peaceful protest is one in accord with the First Amendment.  In such protests, crimes are not committed, and when some commit crimes, the police immediately arrest and remove them. Riots are what we’re discussing, riots inspired and supported for racist, political, destructive goals.  Black Lives Matter is a racist, Marxist organization with one primary goal: the destruction of American society.  D/S/Cs call this “fundamental transformation.”  These are actual domestic terrorists, and a great many common criminals and sociopaths take advantage of their “mostly peaceful protests.”

In Kenosha, most of those committing violent felonies were white.  Where’s the racism, the white supremacy in preventing them from committing those crimes?  With a single exception, every one of the thugs that tried to kill Kyle Rittenhouse were white?  Was the black thug, a felon with a long criminal record whose identity the Prosecution hid, a white supremacist, or was Rittenhouse a white supremacist for defending his life?

Is arguing black Americans are incapable of supporting themselves, of civilized behavior, so they must be allowed to steal, assault, loot, burn and murder somehow noble, somehow a manifestation of truth and justice, or is it racist?  Who are the racists, those that argue black Americans are immoral thieves, robbers, burglars, arsonists and murderers, or those who believe them moral, intelligent beings, capable of society-building good behavior?  Those who expect nothing of them, or those who hold them to account for their actions?  Are well-off whites who take advantage of riots, supposedly to support such evil goals noble and anti-racist, or rather anti-American, anti-civilization?  If we exempt any group of Americans from the law, from civilized behavior, from morality, if we expect only evil from them and excuse, even praise it, how long can America last?

Final Thoughts:

Kyle Rittenhouse and every other armed citizen had every right to be there that night.  They had every right, legal and moral, to be armed.  They had every right to protect property and to deter the mob.  We all do.

The thugs they deterred had no right to be there.  They had no right to commit crimes, to riot.  They took advantage of the stupidity, the betrayal, the evil of the politicians of Kenosha, WI and of Wisconsin’s feckless D/S/C Governor.  People like Kyle Rittenhouse held the line between the rule of law and a state of anarchy.

The Founders believed some things, such as the loss of liberty, are worse than death. They pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to that cause, to that principle.  We owe them more than we can repay.

There are powerful forces arrayed against liberty.  They would disarm us, substitute social justice for the rule of law, the whims of Marxists for the Constitution and natural law.  They would divide us by calling racism “equity,” by calling evil good, by encouraging us to hate each other, encouraging us to deny our common humanity, by substituting racist preferences for merit and accomplishment.  They would destroy our economy, our sovereignty and our standard of living.

They are evil, and evil has one source.

We are now engaged in a battle to discover if we have the mettle, the wisdom to embrace what the Founders knew, what they risked everything to achieve.  Kenosha, WI was merely one battlefield, the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse one small victory, a temporary vindication of the rule of law, of self-defense, the foundation upon which all human rights stands.  The enemies of civilization, of equality under the law, of human rights will never rest.  They must be fought every day, in every community, in every courtroom, and they must be defeated.  Evil thrives best when people shrink from calling it what it is.

Who are we, and for what do we stand?