The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
The Kids Are All Right (With Guns)
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the same YouGov poll, the percentages who say gun control is either “not very important” or “not at all important, by sex, age, race, and political orientation:

The survey doesn’t ask for rank ordering of issues so there is a strong tendency for assigning high levels of importance to virtually everything (with gay rights being a notable exception) across the board. The thing worth noting is how the post-Parkland shooting narrative about kids all over the country demanding gun seizures is fabrication.

There isn’t much of a generational divide on gun rights, but to the extent that there is one, younger people are more supportive of gun rights than older people are. This holds even though younger cohorts are less white and non-whites–blacks, specifically–are modestly more gun-restrictionist than whites are. Young white men are about as pro-gun as it gets.

 
• Category: Culture/Society • Tags: Generational gap, Guns, Polling 
Hide 78 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. See, now this is another one is which the question being asked really doesn’t pin down the views of the polled individual at all. I could see the answer “The Economy” meaning something, because we’re pretty sure nobody is rooting for a bad economy in future, making it an important issue in this sense. When you put in “The Economy” you mean that a good economic situation is an important issue to you.

    This is NOT the same in regards to “Gun Control” being important to someone answering this poll or survey. Lot of gun rights people think gun control is VERY IMPORTANT. It’s very important that we stop more gun control and keep introducing Constitutional Carry (no permit required but Amendment II) into more States.

    Indeed, I would put “Gun Control” right up on my list of important issues, A.E., because I want it to stop.*

    I think this is a terrible way to ask a question to get useful information. All that said, I am hopeful about the young people and gun rights. They grew up in an era, for the last 30 years, in which we’ve rolled back lots of the gun-control stupidity that started in 1968, and the Lyin’ Press never got any traction anymore with the people regarding self-defense use of guns especially. People are really getting on to their tricks on this issue.

    .

    * Then there are the semi-facetious types, well, like me, who also argue that we need more gun control, as in deep, steady breathing, a proper sight picture, and practice, practice, practice!

    • Agree: Cloudbuster
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    That's a good point, and I wouldn't have created this post if it wasn't in line with previous data I've looked at on the question.

    Even if they don't ask for directional support on an issue, rank ordering is better than this, too. But we work with what we have.
    , @Oleaginous Outrager

    we’re pretty sure nobody is rooting for a bad economy in future
     
    Objection, Your Honor! Assuming facts not in evidence.

    Have you never been to Zero Hedge?

  2. I guess Fortnite was a good thing after all. It taught kids a healthy respect for rainbow colored guns and oversized magazines.

  3. Sean says:

    Guns and fast cars are behavioural triggers for reward pathways, that is why movies are full of guns and car chases and guns are so often on the cover of a book or DVD, even more often than attractive young women in dishabille. Orientation to reward is stronger when one is young.It is most strongest of all in psychopaths.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I respectfully disagree, Mr. Freud. Could another possible explanation be that there are men that understand what it will take to defend themselves and their families against the bad elements, some others who like to hunt, others who like shooting as a sport or hobby, others who collect them (like the cars) as a hobby and/or financial investment, and yet others who actually understand that Americans like themselves may have to one day defend their families against and out-of-control US Gov't?

    Naaahhh, it's gotta be those pathways and shit. Okkayy, if you say so.

    , @iffen
    Trying to get a reward from a voluptuous woman who wears sheer, skin tight clothing and bandoliers and who drives Mad Max sports cars is 10 times more dangerous than being a male black widow spider.
    , @Rosie

    Orientation to reward is stronger when one is young.It is most strongest of all in psychopaths
     
    That's fascinating. I had never heard that before, but it certainly rings true. Among my kids, the least reward-dependent are also the most empathetic. You don't have to bribe these types of kids, nor punish them; you just have to explain how their behavior affects others for good or ill.
  4. As usual, you don’t see the forest for the trees.

    Yeah, sure, Farmer John should be able to buy a shotgun without difficulty.

    But gun control, and the NRA, aren’t about Farmer John. They just want you to think they are.

    They are about international arms dealers. If you don’t “control,” that is, monitor, Farmer John’s gun, you don’t “control,” that is, monitor, the billion dollar sales of international arms dealers, most of whom live within easy driving distance of Washington.

    And so, as usual, they make suckers out of you suckers. You think you’re defending your little guns. When you are really defending the riches of a bunch of foreigners selling other foreigners armaments wholesale. Typical.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Can it not be both things simultaneously?
    , @Oleaginous Outrager
    Even by the standards of bat shit internet "ackshually" insanity, this takes the cake. Are you seriously arguing that attempts to eviscerate the Second Amendment are actually an attempt to squelch the international arms trade? Seriously? How come no one on the "gun control" side ever brings this up?
    , @Gordo
    Bullshit.

    Arms dealing in the UK is big, big business, but we can't own a butterknife with a blade more than 3 inches long.
    , @The Germ Theory of Disease
    This is the stupidest remark from a very stupid commenter I've seen in some time.

    As the physicists like to say, it's so stupid, it's not even wrong.
    , @Lars Porsena
    You are African, as in in Africa, Nigerian right?

    What kind of arms do you suppose these dealers are selling? Whenever I see rebels in Africa they are running around with machine guns and kalishnakovs and RPGs.

    https://fas.org/asmp/library/articles/SchroederLamb.pdf

    Instead, small arms are seized or stolen from government forces,
    looted from state armouries, purchased from corrupt soldiers
    and stolen from private owners. Similarly, peacekeepers are
    occasionally relieved of (or voluntarily part with) their small arms,
    which often end up in rebel arsenals. The ambush of Guinean
    peacekeepers in January 2000, for example, netted Sierra Leonean
    rebels more than 550 weapons, including assault rifl es, machine
    guns, rocket-propelled grenades and two tons of ammunition.
     

    “merchants of death” — the globe-trotting arms brokers who
    specialise in the clandestine delivery of weapons to war zones and
    dictators. Representative of these transfers is a 68-ton shipment
    that was fl own into Burkina Faso in March 1999 and later shipped
    to Liberia and Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front (RUF).
    UN investigators, who summarised their fi ndings in a July 2000
    report, reviewed the shipment and found 715 boxes containing
    3000 assault rifl es, 25 rocket-propelled grenades, 50 machine
    guns, and several guided anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.
     
    Do you realize none of these weapons are even legal for civilians in the US and none of them are getting bought by Farmer John and none of them are being discussed about with gun control laws?

    In US gun control parlance any gun with a bayonet mount or a foward pistol grip is an 'assault weapon'. They are all semi-automatic. How do you figure our protecting our shotguns has anything to do with who's providing African countries machine guns and RPGs? AKs and anti-aircraft missiles are already illegal in the US, they are not being laundered through NRA supporters.
  5. @Achmed E. Newman
    See, now this is another one is which the question being asked really doesn't pin down the views of the polled individual at all. I could see the answer "The Economy" meaning something, because we're pretty sure nobody is rooting for a bad economy in future, making it an important issue in this sense. When you put in "The Economy" you mean that a good economic situation is an important issue to you.

    This is NOT the same in regards to "Gun Control" being important to someone answering this poll or survey. Lot of gun rights people think gun control is VERY IMPORTANT. It's very important that we stop more gun control and keep introducing Constitutional Carry (no permit required but Amendment II) into more States.

    Indeed, I would put "Gun Control" right up on my list of important issues, A.E., because I want it to stop.*

    I think this is a terrible way to ask a question to get useful information. All that said, I am hopeful about the young people and gun rights. They grew up in an era, for the last 30 years, in which we've rolled back lots of the gun-control stupidity that started in 1968, and the Lyin' Press never got any traction anymore with the people regarding self-defense use of guns especially. People are really getting on to their tricks on this issue.

    .

    * Then there are the semi-facetious types, well, like me, who also argue that we need more gun control, as in deep, steady breathing, a proper sight picture, and practice, practice, practice!

    That’s a good point, and I wouldn’t have created this post if it wasn’t in line with previous data I’ve looked at on the question.

    Even if they don’t ask for directional support on an issue, rank ordering is better than this, too. But we work with what we have.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    But we work with what we have.
     
    Yep. I understand.
  6. @obwandiyag
    As usual, you don't see the forest for the trees.

    Yeah, sure, Farmer John should be able to buy a shotgun without difficulty.

    But gun control, and the NRA, aren't about Farmer John. They just want you to think they are.

    They are about international arms dealers. If you don't "control," that is, monitor, Farmer John's gun, you don't "control," that is, monitor, the billion dollar sales of international arms dealers, most of whom live within easy driving distance of Washington.

    And so, as usual, they make suckers out of you suckers. You think you're defending your little guns. When you are really defending the riches of a bunch of foreigners selling other foreigners armaments wholesale. Typical.

    Can it not be both things simultaneously?

  7. The survey doesn’t ask for rank ordering of issues so there is a strong tendency for assigning high levels of importance to virtually everything ….

    Does the question pertain to existing gun control or proposed gun control?

    Dumb questions are very common. I would say they are “not very important”. But when pollsters ask dumb questions? How does that happen?

  8. @Achmed E. Newman
    See, now this is another one is which the question being asked really doesn't pin down the views of the polled individual at all. I could see the answer "The Economy" meaning something, because we're pretty sure nobody is rooting for a bad economy in future, making it an important issue in this sense. When you put in "The Economy" you mean that a good economic situation is an important issue to you.

    This is NOT the same in regards to "Gun Control" being important to someone answering this poll or survey. Lot of gun rights people think gun control is VERY IMPORTANT. It's very important that we stop more gun control and keep introducing Constitutional Carry (no permit required but Amendment II) into more States.

    Indeed, I would put "Gun Control" right up on my list of important issues, A.E., because I want it to stop.*

    I think this is a terrible way to ask a question to get useful information. All that said, I am hopeful about the young people and gun rights. They grew up in an era, for the last 30 years, in which we've rolled back lots of the gun-control stupidity that started in 1968, and the Lyin' Press never got any traction anymore with the people regarding self-defense use of guns especially. People are really getting on to their tricks on this issue.

    .

    * Then there are the semi-facetious types, well, like me, who also argue that we need more gun control, as in deep, steady breathing, a proper sight picture, and practice, practice, practice!

    we’re pretty sure nobody is rooting for a bad economy in future

    Objection, Your Honor! Assuming facts not in evidence.

    Have you never been to Zero Hedge?

    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Since you mentioned it, O.O. I used to read all ZH articles daily back 5 years ago or so! Yeah, they were pretty gloom-and-doomy, but the commenters used to be the very best. A while back, there were so many ads/scripts/whatever, that the site was unusable. Now the comments are hidden till you open them up, the cusswords are asterisked out, and 3/4 of the articles are purely political and not financial at all. I guess it wasn't all gloom and doom for Tyler Durden after all! (See Peak Stupidity's movie review: Movie Review - Fight Club still sucks.)
  9. @obwandiyag
    As usual, you don't see the forest for the trees.

    Yeah, sure, Farmer John should be able to buy a shotgun without difficulty.

    But gun control, and the NRA, aren't about Farmer John. They just want you to think they are.

    They are about international arms dealers. If you don't "control," that is, monitor, Farmer John's gun, you don't "control," that is, monitor, the billion dollar sales of international arms dealers, most of whom live within easy driving distance of Washington.

    And so, as usual, they make suckers out of you suckers. You think you're defending your little guns. When you are really defending the riches of a bunch of foreigners selling other foreigners armaments wholesale. Typical.

    Even by the standards of bat shit internet “ackshually” insanity, this takes the cake. Are you seriously arguing that attempts to eviscerate the Second Amendment are actually an attempt to squelch the international arms trade? Seriously? How come no one on the “gun control” side ever brings this up?

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    You can always count on the low-information types to bring up the NRA as the boogeyman when, in reality, they are rather “moderate” on gun rights (they have compromised a lot over the years).* I suppose it’s a good thing they don’t know about Gun Owners of America (GOA) and other “no compromise” organizations as well as many excellent state-level grassroots groups.

    These same types also claim the NRA represents the eeeeevil firearms industry, when in fact there is separate organization that does actually represent gun makers - the National Shooting Sports Foundation, in Newtown, CT, I might add.

    *I stopped supporting the NRA a long time ago, because I realized it was an access-based organization that was serving as a piggy bank for those in control (so none of its recently publicized internal turmoil surprised me one bit). Since then I have only supported grassroots and local groups.
  10. So the outliers (nadirs) are women, those aged 30-44, blacks, and liberals.

    I’ll cut women some slack here, because female gun ownership, CCW permit acquisition rate, hunting participation, and support for gun control are all up in recent years. They are coming around.

    Also, while the lack of interest in gun control is one thing, but for actual, positive support of the 2nd Amendment, I think whites rank higher than all the other ethno-racial groups by a wide margin.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    female... support for gun control
     
    Sorry, I meant “support for gun rights.”
  11. @Oleaginous Outrager
    Even by the standards of bat shit internet "ackshually" insanity, this takes the cake. Are you seriously arguing that attempts to eviscerate the Second Amendment are actually an attempt to squelch the international arms trade? Seriously? How come no one on the "gun control" side ever brings this up?

    You can always count on the low-information types to bring up the NRA as the boogeyman when, in reality, they are rather “moderate” on gun rights (they have compromised a lot over the years).* I suppose it’s a good thing they don’t know about Gun Owners of America (GOA) and other “no compromise” organizations as well as many excellent state-level grassroots groups.

    These same types also claim the NRA represents the eeeeevil firearms industry, when in fact there is separate organization that does actually represent gun makers – the National Shooting Sports Foundation, in Newtown, CT, I might add.

    *I stopped supporting the NRA a long time ago, because I realized it was an access-based organization that was serving as a piggy bank for those in control (so none of its recently publicized internal turmoil surprised me one bit). Since then I have only supported grassroots and local groups.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    While I agree with you on the resolve of the GOA vs. the NRA, I stay a member of the NRA for one reason - the numbers. They still have a hell of a lot of clout, Twinkie, and they are a force for good. I pay my money just to add 1 more to their large membership number they can use when talking to politicians.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    I think SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute is more of an organization of the gun industry, although I think it's activities revolve more around the setting of standards for firearms and ammunition. The "gun industry" and the NRA sometimes take contradictory positions; American firearm manufacturers would very much like to keep out foreign competition.
  12. @Oleaginous Outrager

    we’re pretty sure nobody is rooting for a bad economy in future
     
    Objection, Your Honor! Assuming facts not in evidence.

    Have you never been to Zero Hedge?

    Since you mentioned it, O.O. I used to read all ZH articles daily back 5 years ago or so! Yeah, they were pretty gloom-and-doomy, but the commenters used to be the very best. A while back, there were so many ads/scripts/whatever, that the site was unusable. Now the comments are hidden till you open them up, the cusswords are asterisked out, and 3/4 of the articles are purely political and not financial at all. I guess it wasn’t all gloom and doom for Tyler Durden after all! (See Peak Stupidity’s movie review: Movie Review – Fight Club still sucks.)

  13. @Sean
    Guns and fast cars are behavioural triggers for reward pathways, that is why movies are full of guns and car chases and guns are so often on the cover of a book or DVD, even more often than attractive young women in dishabille. Orientation to reward is stronger when one is young.It is most strongest of all in psychopaths.

    I respectfully disagree, Mr. Freud. Could another possible explanation be that there are men that understand what it will take to defend themselves and their families against the bad elements, some others who like to hunt, others who like shooting as a sport or hobby, others who collect them (like the cars) as a hobby and/or financial investment, and yet others who actually understand that Americans like themselves may have to one day defend their families against and out-of-control US Gov’t?

    Naaahhh, it’s gotta be those pathways and shit. Okkayy, if you say so.

  14. @Twinkie
    You can always count on the low-information types to bring up the NRA as the boogeyman when, in reality, they are rather “moderate” on gun rights (they have compromised a lot over the years).* I suppose it’s a good thing they don’t know about Gun Owners of America (GOA) and other “no compromise” organizations as well as many excellent state-level grassroots groups.

    These same types also claim the NRA represents the eeeeevil firearms industry, when in fact there is separate organization that does actually represent gun makers - the National Shooting Sports Foundation, in Newtown, CT, I might add.

    *I stopped supporting the NRA a long time ago, because I realized it was an access-based organization that was serving as a piggy bank for those in control (so none of its recently publicized internal turmoil surprised me one bit). Since then I have only supported grassroots and local groups.

    While I agree with you on the resolve of the GOA vs. the NRA, I stay a member of the NRA for one reason – the numbers. They still have a hell of a lot of clout, Twinkie, and they are a force for good. I pay my money just to add 1 more to their large membership number they can use when talking to politicians.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    Force for good? No, NRA’s leaders have been living large on the membership dues (the actual lobbying is done by NRA-ILA, the Institute for Legislative Action, which has a separate budget and is a separate entity). Frankly, it’s a scare-mongering racket.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/nra-money-flowed-to-board-members-amid-allegedly-lavish-spending-by-top-officials-and-vendors/2019/06/09/3eafe160-8186-11e9-9a67-a687ca99fb3d_story.html
  15. @Sean
    Guns and fast cars are behavioural triggers for reward pathways, that is why movies are full of guns and car chases and guns are so often on the cover of a book or DVD, even more often than attractive young women in dishabille. Orientation to reward is stronger when one is young.It is most strongest of all in psychopaths.

    Trying to get a reward from a voluptuous woman who wears sheer, skin tight clothing and bandoliers and who drives Mad Max sports cars is 10 times more dangerous than being a male black widow spider.

    • LOL: Cloudbuster
  16. @Achmed E. Newman
    While I agree with you on the resolve of the GOA vs. the NRA, I stay a member of the NRA for one reason - the numbers. They still have a hell of a lot of clout, Twinkie, and they are a force for good. I pay my money just to add 1 more to their large membership number they can use when talking to politicians.

    Force for good? No, NRA’s leaders have been living large on the membership dues (the actual lobbying is done by NRA-ILA, the Institute for Legislative Action, which has a separate budget and is a separate entity). Frankly, it’s a scare-mongering racket.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/nra-money-flowed-to-board-members-amid-allegedly-lavish-spending-by-top-officials-and-vendors/2019/06/09/3eafe160-8186-11e9-9a67-a687ca99fb3d_story.html

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    I view the NRA as the biggest, best funded gun control organization in the US. NRA has helped write (and endorsed) every gun control bill to come out of Congress starting with the 1934 National Firearms Act.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Scare-mongering? That's probably a good way to raise money from the big donors (not me). Sure, Twinkie, any large organization like the NRA eventually starts to get the big cheeses living large and does things to keep themselves in business. I don't agree at all that the NRA is not a force for good though. Mr. Partain's reply did mention the 1934 act and I could bring up something else the surrendered on in 1968 I believe. I think they've done alright lately, but if it's mostly the ILA part, then that's fine.

    I read the magazine, and though you say it's on a different budget, the ILA is still a big part of it. I make sure the magazines, after I've read them, reach some more people (Dr.'s offices, etc.) too.

    Nope, my 5-year's-worth $12o or so is just my way of putting my name onto the list of 5 million members. That number scares a whole lot of politicians straight. Do you remember that Al Gore regretted his gun-control statements that many people think lost him his home state of Tennessee in 2000?
  17. @Twinkie
    So the outliers (nadirs) are women, those aged 30-44, blacks, and liberals.

    I’ll cut women some slack here, because female gun ownership, CCW permit acquisition rate, hunting participation, and support for gun control are all up in recent years. They are coming around.

    Also, while the lack of interest in gun control is one thing, but for actual, positive support of the 2nd Amendment, I think whites rank higher than all the other ethno-racial groups by a wide margin.

    female… support for gun control

    Sorry, I meant “support for gun rights.”

  18. @Twinkie
    Force for good? No, NRA’s leaders have been living large on the membership dues (the actual lobbying is done by NRA-ILA, the Institute for Legislative Action, which has a separate budget and is a separate entity). Frankly, it’s a scare-mongering racket.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/nra-money-flowed-to-board-members-amid-allegedly-lavish-spending-by-top-officials-and-vendors/2019/06/09/3eafe160-8186-11e9-9a67-a687ca99fb3d_story.html

    I view the NRA as the biggest, best funded gun control organization in the US. NRA has helped write (and endorsed) every gun control bill to come out of Congress starting with the 1934 National Firearms Act.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    A lot of people have said this over the years, but I don't think it is true today. Additionally, the NRA, though a 1-issue political organization, has finally come to understand that lots of other unconstitutional actions by the US government affects the right to keep/bear arms too.

    The NRA does a good job getting involved in State politics. Look at the map below - NRA support had a whole lot to do with this.

    I'm not writing this to sign up new members. I recommend the G.O.A. just as Twinkie did.

    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/CCC.gif
  19. @obwandiyag
    As usual, you don't see the forest for the trees.

    Yeah, sure, Farmer John should be able to buy a shotgun without difficulty.

    But gun control, and the NRA, aren't about Farmer John. They just want you to think they are.

    They are about international arms dealers. If you don't "control," that is, monitor, Farmer John's gun, you don't "control," that is, monitor, the billion dollar sales of international arms dealers, most of whom live within easy driving distance of Washington.

    And so, as usual, they make suckers out of you suckers. You think you're defending your little guns. When you are really defending the riches of a bunch of foreigners selling other foreigners armaments wholesale. Typical.

    Bullshit.

    Arms dealing in the UK is big, big business, but we can’t own a butterknife with a blade more than 3 inches long.

  20. @Audacious Epigone
    That's a good point, and I wouldn't have created this post if it wasn't in line with previous data I've looked at on the question.

    Even if they don't ask for directional support on an issue, rank ordering is better than this, too. But we work with what we have.

    But we work with what we have.

    Yep. I understand.

  21. @Twinkie
    Force for good? No, NRA’s leaders have been living large on the membership dues (the actual lobbying is done by NRA-ILA, the Institute for Legislative Action, which has a separate budget and is a separate entity). Frankly, it’s a scare-mongering racket.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/nra-money-flowed-to-board-members-amid-allegedly-lavish-spending-by-top-officials-and-vendors/2019/06/09/3eafe160-8186-11e9-9a67-a687ca99fb3d_story.html

    Scare-mongering? That’s probably a good way to raise money from the big donors (not me). Sure, Twinkie, any large organization like the NRA eventually starts to get the big cheeses living large and does things to keep themselves in business. I don’t agree at all that the NRA is not a force for good though. Mr. Partain’s reply did mention the 1934 act and I could bring up something else the surrendered on in 1968 I believe. I think they’ve done alright lately, but if it’s mostly the ILA part, then that’s fine.

    I read the magazine, and though you say it’s on a different budget, the ILA is still a big part of it. I make sure the magazines, after I’ve read them, reach some more people (Dr.’s offices, etc.) too.

    Nope, my 5-year’s-worth $12o or so is just my way of putting my name onto the list of 5 million members. That number scares a whole lot of politicians straight. Do you remember that Al Gore regretted his gun-control statements that many people think lost him his home state of Tennessee in 2000?

  22. @Twodees Partain
    I view the NRA as the biggest, best funded gun control organization in the US. NRA has helped write (and endorsed) every gun control bill to come out of Congress starting with the 1934 National Firearms Act.

    A lot of people have said this over the years, but I don’t think it is true today. Additionally, the NRA, though a 1-issue political organization, has finally come to understand that lots of other unconstitutional actions by the US government affects the right to keep/bear arms too.

    The NRA does a good job getting involved in State politics. Look at the map below – NRA support had a whole lot to do with this.

    I’m not writing this to sign up new members. I recommend the G.O.A. just as Twinkie did.

  23. The one conservative principle that has been not only successfully defended by expanded is the Second Amendment. Alas, not in my state of NJ.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Part of the success of the NRA, GOA, and other similar organizations is their disciplined single-issue focus. Branch out beyond that to other libertarian/conservative causes, and you'll inevitably alienate some number of people who are with you on your ostensible raison d'etre.
  24. SFG says:

    This shows why the 2nd amendment is still around: conservatives are more interested in protecting it than liberals are in repealing it. (Liberals don’t like guns, but they have other issues they care about more.)

    I admit, even in my liberal days, I was always pro-2A; I wanted one.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    This shows why the 2nd amendment is still around: conservatives are more interested in protecting it than liberals are in repealing it.
     
    It's still around because it's harmless and irrelevant. If guns mattered you can be sure that liberals would take them away from you.
  25. @Sean
    Guns and fast cars are behavioural triggers for reward pathways, that is why movies are full of guns and car chases and guns are so often on the cover of a book or DVD, even more often than attractive young women in dishabille. Orientation to reward is stronger when one is young.It is most strongest of all in psychopaths.

    Orientation to reward is stronger when one is young.It is most strongest of all in psychopaths

    That’s fascinating. I had never heard that before, but it certainly rings true. Among my kids, the least reward-dependent are also the most empathetic. You don’t have to bribe these types of kids, nor punish them; you just have to explain how their behavior affects others for good or ill.

  26. @obwandiyag
    As usual, you don't see the forest for the trees.

    Yeah, sure, Farmer John should be able to buy a shotgun without difficulty.

    But gun control, and the NRA, aren't about Farmer John. They just want you to think they are.

    They are about international arms dealers. If you don't "control," that is, monitor, Farmer John's gun, you don't "control," that is, monitor, the billion dollar sales of international arms dealers, most of whom live within easy driving distance of Washington.

    And so, as usual, they make suckers out of you suckers. You think you're defending your little guns. When you are really defending the riches of a bunch of foreigners selling other foreigners armaments wholesale. Typical.

    This is the stupidest remark from a very stupid commenter I’ve seen in some time.

    As the physicists like to say, it’s so stupid, it’s not even wrong.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  27. @Ris_Eruwaedhiel
    The one conservative principle that has been not only successfully defended by expanded is the Second Amendment. Alas, not in my state of NJ.

    Part of the success of the NRA, GOA, and other similar organizations is their disciplined single-issue focus. Branch out beyond that to other libertarian/conservative causes, and you’ll inevitably alienate some number of people who are with you on your ostensible raison d’etre.

    • Replies: @iffen
    single-issue focus

    That's the ticket!

    All we have to do is find that one issue that all us dissidents can agree on.

    You go first.
  28. @SFG
    This shows why the 2nd amendment is still around: conservatives are more interested in protecting it than liberals are in repealing it. (Liberals don't like guns, but they have other issues they care about more.)

    I admit, even in my liberal days, I was always pro-2A; I wanted one.

    This shows why the 2nd amendment is still around: conservatives are more interested in protecting it than liberals are in repealing it.

    It’s still around because it’s harmless and irrelevant. If guns mattered you can be sure that liberals would take them away from you.

    • Disagree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Anounder
    There's too much fixation on the noble peasant killing the mean knight (or in modern words, the noble Vietnamese killing the mean green soldier) among the alternative right. Guns indeed do not matter if there's no solid organization with an undisputed command structure, source of foreign support, lack of other enemies to keep the empire busy. The Deep State easily controls propaganda and came frame any uprisings friendly to the non-Cuckservative right as the return of Nazis/Crusaders or just filthy trash who fuck their cousins/sisters trying to kill all the Darkies/Gays.
    , @peterAUS
    No.
    Owning guns, for the topic I think we are talking about, is important for three things:
    Getting proficient.
    Getting even on the individual level.
    Getting real guns if/when an opportunity arises.

    Which brings us to the next level I'll address below.
  29. @Twinkie
    You can always count on the low-information types to bring up the NRA as the boogeyman when, in reality, they are rather “moderate” on gun rights (they have compromised a lot over the years).* I suppose it’s a good thing they don’t know about Gun Owners of America (GOA) and other “no compromise” organizations as well as many excellent state-level grassroots groups.

    These same types also claim the NRA represents the eeeeevil firearms industry, when in fact there is separate organization that does actually represent gun makers - the National Shooting Sports Foundation, in Newtown, CT, I might add.

    *I stopped supporting the NRA a long time ago, because I realized it was an access-based organization that was serving as a piggy bank for those in control (so none of its recently publicized internal turmoil surprised me one bit). Since then I have only supported grassroots and local groups.

    I think SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute is more of an organization of the gun industry, although I think it’s activities revolve more around the setting of standards for firearms and ammunition. The “gun industry” and the NRA sometimes take contradictory positions; American firearm manufacturers would very much like to keep out foreign competition.

  30. @dfordoom

    This shows why the 2nd amendment is still around: conservatives are more interested in protecting it than liberals are in repealing it.
     
    It's still around because it's harmless and irrelevant. If guns mattered you can be sure that liberals would take them away from you.

    There’s too much fixation on the noble peasant killing the mean knight (or in modern words, the noble Vietnamese killing the mean green soldier) among the alternative right. Guns indeed do not matter if there’s no solid organization with an undisputed command structure, source of foreign support, lack of other enemies to keep the empire busy. The Deep State easily controls propaganda and came frame any uprisings friendly to the non-Cuckservative right as the return of Nazis/Crusaders or just filthy trash who fuck their cousins/sisters trying to kill all the Darkies/Gays.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    There’s too much fixation on the noble peasant killing the mean knight (or in modern words, the noble Vietnamese killing the mean green soldier) among the alternative right. Guns indeed do not matter if there’s no solid organization with an undisputed command structure, source of foreign support, lack of other enemies to keep the empire busy.
     
    Yep. The government does not just have guns. It has armies. It has organised paramilitary units (the police). An army will easily crush a rabble, even an armed rabble. No rabble has ever defeated an army.

    The Vietcong were not a rabble. And the North Vietnamese Army was certainly not a rabble.

    The Deep State easily controls propaganda and came frame any uprisings friendly to the non-Cuckservative right as the return of Nazis/Crusaders or just filthy trash who fuck their cousins/sisters trying to kill all the Darkies/Gays.
     
    That's something that alt-righters just can't seem to understand. You cannot stage a successful rebellion with zero outside support, zero elite support and zero support from ordinary people. And that's the level of support that the kind of rebellion they fantasise about would attract - zero.

    Alt-righters need to do a bit of reading about successful revolutionary movements. Revolution is something they know nothing about.
  31. @Anounder
    There's too much fixation on the noble peasant killing the mean knight (or in modern words, the noble Vietnamese killing the mean green soldier) among the alternative right. Guns indeed do not matter if there's no solid organization with an undisputed command structure, source of foreign support, lack of other enemies to keep the empire busy. The Deep State easily controls propaganda and came frame any uprisings friendly to the non-Cuckservative right as the return of Nazis/Crusaders or just filthy trash who fuck their cousins/sisters trying to kill all the Darkies/Gays.

    There’s too much fixation on the noble peasant killing the mean knight (or in modern words, the noble Vietnamese killing the mean green soldier) among the alternative right. Guns indeed do not matter if there’s no solid organization with an undisputed command structure, source of foreign support, lack of other enemies to keep the empire busy.

    Yep. The government does not just have guns. It has armies. It has organised paramilitary units (the police). An army will easily crush a rabble, even an armed rabble. No rabble has ever defeated an army.

    The Vietcong were not a rabble. And the North Vietnamese Army was certainly not a rabble.

    The Deep State easily controls propaganda and came frame any uprisings friendly to the non-Cuckservative right as the return of Nazis/Crusaders or just filthy trash who fuck their cousins/sisters trying to kill all the Darkies/Gays.

    That’s something that alt-righters just can’t seem to understand. You cannot stage a successful rebellion with zero outside support, zero elite support and zero support from ordinary people. And that’s the level of support that the kind of rebellion they fantasise about would attract – zero.

    Alt-righters need to do a bit of reading about successful revolutionary movements. Revolution is something they know nothing about.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    No.

    An average city, in US, can, with ease, stage a successful rebellion which would shake US elites to the core. Could change the social and political landscape in a month.

    10 000 persons, with firearms they own as we speak, can, in a city of 100 000 do it. Tomorrow.

    Agree, somebody does need to organize all that. I am absolutely positive there are people, as we speak, in any of such cities, capable of that.

    The capability is there as we speak.
    There is no will to do so.

    At least for the moment.
    Within next, say, 10 years, we'll see.
  32. @Audacious Epigone
    Part of the success of the NRA, GOA, and other similar organizations is their disciplined single-issue focus. Branch out beyond that to other libertarian/conservative causes, and you'll inevitably alienate some number of people who are with you on your ostensible raison d'etre.

    single-issue focus

    That’s the ticket!

    All we have to do is find that one issue that all us dissidents can agree on.

    You go first.

  33. @obwandiyag
    As usual, you don't see the forest for the trees.

    Yeah, sure, Farmer John should be able to buy a shotgun without difficulty.

    But gun control, and the NRA, aren't about Farmer John. They just want you to think they are.

    They are about international arms dealers. If you don't "control," that is, monitor, Farmer John's gun, you don't "control," that is, monitor, the billion dollar sales of international arms dealers, most of whom live within easy driving distance of Washington.

    And so, as usual, they make suckers out of you suckers. You think you're defending your little guns. When you are really defending the riches of a bunch of foreigners selling other foreigners armaments wholesale. Typical.

    You are African, as in in Africa, Nigerian right?

    What kind of arms do you suppose these dealers are selling? Whenever I see rebels in Africa they are running around with machine guns and kalishnakovs and RPGs.

    https://fas.org/asmp/library/articles/SchroederLamb.pdf

    Instead, small arms are seized or stolen from government forces,
    looted from state armouries, purchased from corrupt soldiers
    and stolen from private owners. Similarly, peacekeepers are
    occasionally relieved of (or voluntarily part with) their small arms,
    which often end up in rebel arsenals. The ambush of Guinean
    peacekeepers in January 2000, for example, netted Sierra Leonean
    rebels more than 550 weapons, including assault rifl es, machine
    guns, rocket-propelled grenades and two tons of ammunition.

    “merchants of death” — the globe-trotting arms brokers who
    specialise in the clandestine delivery of weapons to war zones and
    dictators. Representative of these transfers is a 68-ton shipment
    that was fl own into Burkina Faso in March 1999 and later shipped
    to Liberia and Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front (RUF).
    UN investigators, who summarised their fi ndings in a July 2000
    report, reviewed the shipment and found 715 boxes containing
    3000 assault rifl es, 25 rocket-propelled grenades, 50 machine
    guns, and several guided anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

    Do you realize none of these weapons are even legal for civilians in the US and none of them are getting bought by Farmer John and none of them are being discussed about with gun control laws?

    In US gun control parlance any gun with a bayonet mount or a foward pistol grip is an ‘assault weapon’. They are all semi-automatic. How do you figure our protecting our shotguns has anything to do with who’s providing African countries machine guns and RPGs? AKs and anti-aircraft missiles are already illegal in the US, they are not being laundered through NRA supporters.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    How do you figure our protecting our shotguns has anything to do with who’s providing African countries machine guns and RPGs?
     
    Oh, please.  You're asking a magical-thinking savage one step away from practicing a cargo cult to reason based on evidence?  He just showed you how weak his brain is, don't make him sprain it.
  34. @Lars Porsena
    You are African, as in in Africa, Nigerian right?

    What kind of arms do you suppose these dealers are selling? Whenever I see rebels in Africa they are running around with machine guns and kalishnakovs and RPGs.

    https://fas.org/asmp/library/articles/SchroederLamb.pdf

    Instead, small arms are seized or stolen from government forces,
    looted from state armouries, purchased from corrupt soldiers
    and stolen from private owners. Similarly, peacekeepers are
    occasionally relieved of (or voluntarily part with) their small arms,
    which often end up in rebel arsenals. The ambush of Guinean
    peacekeepers in January 2000, for example, netted Sierra Leonean
    rebels more than 550 weapons, including assault rifl es, machine
    guns, rocket-propelled grenades and two tons of ammunition.
     

    “merchants of death” — the globe-trotting arms brokers who
    specialise in the clandestine delivery of weapons to war zones and
    dictators. Representative of these transfers is a 68-ton shipment
    that was fl own into Burkina Faso in March 1999 and later shipped
    to Liberia and Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front (RUF).
    UN investigators, who summarised their fi ndings in a July 2000
    report, reviewed the shipment and found 715 boxes containing
    3000 assault rifl es, 25 rocket-propelled grenades, 50 machine
    guns, and several guided anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.
     
    Do you realize none of these weapons are even legal for civilians in the US and none of them are getting bought by Farmer John and none of them are being discussed about with gun control laws?

    In US gun control parlance any gun with a bayonet mount or a foward pistol grip is an 'assault weapon'. They are all semi-automatic. How do you figure our protecting our shotguns has anything to do with who's providing African countries machine guns and RPGs? AKs and anti-aircraft missiles are already illegal in the US, they are not being laundered through NRA supporters.

    How do you figure our protecting our shotguns has anything to do with who’s providing African countries machine guns and RPGs?

    Oh, please.  You’re asking a magical-thinking savage one step away from practicing a cargo cult to reason based on evidence?  He just showed you how weak his brain is, don’t make him sprain it.

  35. There isn’t much of a generational divide on gun rights, but to the extent that there is one, younger people are more supportive of gun rights than older people are. This holds even though younger cohorts are less white and non-whites–blacks, specifically–are modestly more gun-restrictionist than whites are. Young white men are about as pro-gun as it gets.

    The Republican Party pushes mass legal immigration and amnesty for illegal alien invaders.

    The Republican Party is pushing immigration policies that will kill the 2nd Amendment.

    Whites must abandon the Republican Party or topple the Republican Party ruling class. The GOP donors — such as Shelly Adelson and Paul Singer and the Koch Boys — control the GOP ruling class.

    Trumpy is a complete and total politician whore harlot for Shelly Adelson.

    Tweet from 2015:

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    The hilarious thing about that article is that The Nation’s Gun Show in Dulles is the most PoC-filled gun show I‘ve ever seen (and I’ve been to many gun shows from the massive ones in TX to tiny ones in IA). And not just the consumers - many of the vendors selling guns and gun-related merchandise (as well as the ubiquitous Red Chinese-made Nazi paraphernalia) are PoC as well.
  36. Civilian production of the SP-1 model by Colt actually began in 1964, which means that early SP-1 rifles started becoming Curio & Relic qualified back in 2014. Right now in 2017, more than 10,000 C&R AR15s exist – and this is one of them

  37. @dfordoom

    This shows why the 2nd amendment is still around: conservatives are more interested in protecting it than liberals are in repealing it.
     
    It's still around because it's harmless and irrelevant. If guns mattered you can be sure that liberals would take them away from you.

    No.
    Owning guns, for the topic I think we are talking about, is important for three things:
    Getting proficient.
    Getting even on the individual level.
    Getting real guns if/when an opportunity arises.

    Which brings us to the next level I’ll address below.

  38. @dfordoom

    There’s too much fixation on the noble peasant killing the mean knight (or in modern words, the noble Vietnamese killing the mean green soldier) among the alternative right. Guns indeed do not matter if there’s no solid organization with an undisputed command structure, source of foreign support, lack of other enemies to keep the empire busy.
     
    Yep. The government does not just have guns. It has armies. It has organised paramilitary units (the police). An army will easily crush a rabble, even an armed rabble. No rabble has ever defeated an army.

    The Vietcong were not a rabble. And the North Vietnamese Army was certainly not a rabble.

    The Deep State easily controls propaganda and came frame any uprisings friendly to the non-Cuckservative right as the return of Nazis/Crusaders or just filthy trash who fuck their cousins/sisters trying to kill all the Darkies/Gays.
     
    That's something that alt-righters just can't seem to understand. You cannot stage a successful rebellion with zero outside support, zero elite support and zero support from ordinary people. And that's the level of support that the kind of rebellion they fantasise about would attract - zero.

    Alt-righters need to do a bit of reading about successful revolutionary movements. Revolution is something they know nothing about.

    No.

    An average city, in US, can, with ease, stage a successful rebellion which would shake US elites to the core. Could change the social and political landscape in a month.

    10 000 persons, with firearms they own as we speak, can, in a city of 100 000 do it. Tomorrow.

    Agree, somebody does need to organize all that. I am absolutely positive there are people, as we speak, in any of such cities, capable of that.

    The capability is there as we speak.
    There is no will to do so.

    At least for the moment.
    Within next, say, 10 years, we’ll see.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    BTW this topic pops up here every now and then with the same flow of comments so I'll keep it short this time.
    The people who believe it can't be done keep believing that. Let's agree to disagree and move on.
    For people who aren't sure and have, say, technical questions, ask away and I could try to answer. Disclaimer: won't answer some of them for obvious reasons.
    For people who believe it's possible, well.....the only way to keep discussing it is to meet in person, and after taking some precautions talk, for a day. After that simply know we are on the "list" and the game just changed from blabbing to serious. Like going to prison serious.
    On a serious note: as long as that topic is...ahm...discussed in places as this it simply ain't gonna happen.
    , @Twinkie

    10 000 persons, with firearms they own as we speak, can, in a city of 100 000 do it.
     
    10% mobilization rate is a fantasy, as is the idea that that many can be coordinated spontaneously.

    Besides, you don’t need that many armed to create a no-go zone for the occupying forces. 100-500 is sufficient, provided a substantial portion of the population is sympathetic (or at least fearful enough of the insurgents to provide intel and support and deny them to the occupying forces).

    Unity of command/purpose is more of a problem for insurgents as there inevitably would be rival factions. The Judean People’s Front/the People’s Front of Judea joke works, because it’s so very true.

    In real life, Haganah (later IDF) had to crush and absorb other guerrilla groups - most notably Irgun - before it could operate effectively and purposefully. See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altalena_Affair
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Please take the fed posting elsewhere.
  39. @peterAUS
    No.

    An average city, in US, can, with ease, stage a successful rebellion which would shake US elites to the core. Could change the social and political landscape in a month.

    10 000 persons, with firearms they own as we speak, can, in a city of 100 000 do it. Tomorrow.

    Agree, somebody does need to organize all that. I am absolutely positive there are people, as we speak, in any of such cities, capable of that.

    The capability is there as we speak.
    There is no will to do so.

    At least for the moment.
    Within next, say, 10 years, we'll see.

    BTW this topic pops up here every now and then with the same flow of comments so I’ll keep it short this time.
    The people who believe it can’t be done keep believing that. Let’s agree to disagree and move on.
    For people who aren’t sure and have, say, technical questions, ask away and I could try to answer. Disclaimer: won’t answer some of them for obvious reasons.
    For people who believe it’s possible, well…..the only way to keep discussing it is to meet in person, and after taking some precautions talk, for a day. After that simply know we are on the “list” and the game just changed from blabbing to serious. Like going to prison serious.
    On a serious note: as long as that topic is…ahm…discussed in places as this it simply ain’t gonna happen.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @iffen
    Peter, I know that reiner Tor sees an agent behind most of the rocks but you are really in my sights.

    ..the only way to keep discussing it is to meet in person,



    A question if I may: would you be so kind as to point to some links when a person can see/hear, perhaps even communicate, with people who think/feel as above?
    , @Audacious Epigone
    It's not being "discussed" here. This is the kind of shit that after the next shooting happens and they find the guy once retweeted something from the Unz Review will get the whole thing shut down.

    This is the white ruralist equivalent to the gangbanger thinking he can beat the police force. They will keep coming until you and he are dead.

  40. @peterAUS
    BTW this topic pops up here every now and then with the same flow of comments so I'll keep it short this time.
    The people who believe it can't be done keep believing that. Let's agree to disagree and move on.
    For people who aren't sure and have, say, technical questions, ask away and I could try to answer. Disclaimer: won't answer some of them for obvious reasons.
    For people who believe it's possible, well.....the only way to keep discussing it is to meet in person, and after taking some precautions talk, for a day. After that simply know we are on the "list" and the game just changed from blabbing to serious. Like going to prison serious.
    On a serious note: as long as that topic is...ahm...discussed in places as this it simply ain't gonna happen.

    Peter, I know that reiner Tor sees an agent behind most of the rocks but you are really in my sights.

    ..the only way to keep discussing it is to meet in person,


    A question if I may: would you be so kind as to point to some links when a person can see/hear, perhaps even communicate, with people who think/feel as above?

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Good work.

    I know you are one of the rare people around here "switched on" well enough.

    So, a question.

    What's your gut feeling about this:
    The very idea of any....ahm....how to put it, ah, yes, "politically inspired armed violence" (good enough?) is being brought up and shot down on sites like this for a specific, well thought out, reason.

    It starts as "blah...blah...guns/the Second"....escalates into some sort of "confronting the ZOG/NWO/whatever" and then, by very nature of this media, gets shot down as impossible/suicidal?
    Not by people ignorant about details (my take: around 90% of people on "alt-whatever"), not those scared about possibilities ("civnats" and overall nice people...) but, how to put it, "smart players"?

    And...hehehe....I mean, just funny, "they" very carefully prepare the current system precisely for such possibility/contingency Not that 90% of people around here register that, but that's another story?

    Makes sense?

    Which does bring up that good work of yours.
    There IS a way for smart people who believe it IS possible to talk about it, even in public. No prob.

    Demands two things: the guys on the same page as for "why" and, of course, knowing something about the topic. Say.....those who know inside out Battle for Fallujah, for example. Or similar stuff.
    Test guys, be honest. Have you (the guy reading this...) read the Marine (battalion) post-action report on the battle and consequent lessons learned. Yes, it's online. Read and understood? Really?
    Good, for a starter. A little starter, that is.
    Could you play, just on paper, both sides then and there?
    Really? From squad up to battalion level? Both sides? REALLY!?

    Now, the next step. NO, of course. That's the point when the public chat gets into "no zone".

    Hehe....makes sense?
    Don't worry if it doesn't.
    Back to personal self-defense and LARP-ing.

    All good.

  41. @iffen
    Peter, I know that reiner Tor sees an agent behind most of the rocks but you are really in my sights.

    ..the only way to keep discussing it is to meet in person,



    A question if I may: would you be so kind as to point to some links when a person can see/hear, perhaps even communicate, with people who think/feel as above?

    Good work.

    I know you are one of the rare people around here “switched on” well enough.

    So, a question.

    What’s your gut feeling about this:
    The very idea of any….ahm….how to put it, ah, yes, “politically inspired armed violence” (good enough?) is being brought up and shot down on sites like this for a specific, well thought out, reason.

    It starts as “blah…blah…guns/the Second”….escalates into some sort of “confronting the ZOG/NWO/whatever” and then, by very nature of this media, gets shot down as impossible/suicidal?
    Not by people ignorant about details (my take: around 90% of people on “alt-whatever”), not those scared about possibilities (“civnats” and overall nice people…) but, how to put it, “smart players”?

    And…hehehe….I mean, just funny, “they” very carefully prepare the current system precisely for such possibility/contingency Not that 90% of people around here register that, but that’s another story?

    Makes sense?

    Which does bring up that good work of yours.
    There IS a way for smart people who believe it IS possible to talk about it, even in public. No prob.

    Demands two things: the guys on the same page as for “why” and, of course, knowing something about the topic. Say…..those who know inside out Battle for Fallujah, for example. Or similar stuff.
    Test guys, be honest. Have you (the guy reading this…) read the Marine (battalion) post-action report on the battle and consequent lessons learned. Yes, it’s online. Read and understood? Really?
    Good, for a starter. A little starter, that is.
    Could you play, just on paper, both sides then and there?
    Really? From squad up to battalion level? Both sides? REALLY!?

    Now, the next step. NO, of course. That’s the point when the public chat gets into “no zone”.

    Hehe….makes sense?
    Don’t worry if it doesn’t.
    Back to personal self-defense and LARP-ing.

    All good.

    • Replies: @iffen
    People who believe that whites in the US will "fight" to create a white carve-out are sadly mistaken. You need to understand that "The Narrative" describing the civil rights era is badly flawed, just like the current "picture" as presented by the media is flawed. The resistance to integration was mostly political and in some places, non-existent or half-hearted. The fire-bombings and such were a small part. Most importantly, violent resistance attracted a miniscule number of people and they had no support among the larger population. My point is that if white people were going to violently revolt it would have happened then, and it didn't. Integration, voting rights and such were "accepted" by the white population.

    PS: Most of the violence was conducted by "white trash."

    PPS: Run into a white enclave while being pursued by security forces and there will be many fingers pointing, "he went that way."

  42. @Charles Pewitt

    There isn’t much of a generational divide on gun rights, but to the extent that there is one, younger people are more supportive of gun rights than older people are. This holds even though younger cohorts are less white and non-whites–blacks, specifically–are modestly more gun-restrictionist than whites are. Young white men are about as pro-gun as it gets.

     

    The Republican Party pushes mass legal immigration and amnesty for illegal alien invaders.

    The Republican Party is pushing immigration policies that will kill the 2nd Amendment.

    Whites must abandon the Republican Party or topple the Republican Party ruling class. The GOP donors -- such as Shelly Adelson and Paul Singer and the Koch Boys -- control the GOP ruling class.

    Trumpy is a complete and total politician whore harlot for Shelly Adelson.

    Tweet from 2015:

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/656561461272137728

    The hilarious thing about that article is that The Nation’s Gun Show in Dulles is the most PoC-filled gun show I‘ve ever seen (and I’ve been to many gun shows from the massive ones in TX to tiny ones in IA). And not just the consumers – many of the vendors selling guns and gun-related merchandise (as well as the ubiquitous Red Chinese-made Nazi paraphernalia) are PoC as well.

  43. @peterAUS
    No.

    An average city, in US, can, with ease, stage a successful rebellion which would shake US elites to the core. Could change the social and political landscape in a month.

    10 000 persons, with firearms they own as we speak, can, in a city of 100 000 do it. Tomorrow.

    Agree, somebody does need to organize all that. I am absolutely positive there are people, as we speak, in any of such cities, capable of that.

    The capability is there as we speak.
    There is no will to do so.

    At least for the moment.
    Within next, say, 10 years, we'll see.

    10 000 persons, with firearms they own as we speak, can, in a city of 100 000 do it.

    10% mobilization rate is a fantasy, as is the idea that that many can be coordinated spontaneously.

    Besides, you don’t need that many armed to create a no-go zone for the occupying forces. 100-500 is sufficient, provided a substantial portion of the population is sympathetic (or at least fearful enough of the insurgents to provide intel and support and deny them to the occupying forces).

    Unity of command/purpose is more of a problem for insurgents as there inevitably would be rival factions. The Judean People’s Front/the People’s Front of Judea joke works, because it’s so very true.

    In real life, Haganah (later IDF) had to crush and absorb other guerrilla groups – most notably Irgun – before it could operate effectively and purposefully. See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altalena_Affair

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    provided a substantial portion of the population is sympathetic
     
    My assumption is that anyone who talks about armed insurrection is either a schizophrenic who's stopped taking his meds or an FBI informer. The latter is much more likely but the former is quite possible.

    Either way anyone who talks about armed insurrection is serving the interests of the SJW/globohomo establishment.
    , @peterAUS

    10% mobilization rate is a fantasy, as is the idea that that many can be coordinated spontaneously.
     
    For the scenario we are, I assume, talking about you could be correct for the former.
    Having said that, In Bosnia, for example, there have been dozens of cases where the rate was up to 80%. Four guys on one gun thing etc.
    Boils down to "us" vs "them", or better, what's going to happen to "us" when "they" establish control over "our" part of the territory. Now.....for the scenario, I assume, we are talking about, when you take a look how the guy from Charlottesville is being treated, well.....
    As for the later (coordinated) you could also be correct.
    But, again, in Bosnia, for example, that wasn't the problem. We could argue what "spontaneously" means, of course.

    Besides, you don’t need that many armed to create a no-go zone for the occupying forces. 100-500 is sufficient, provided a substantial portion of the population is sympathetic (or at least fearful enough of the insurgents to provide intel and support and deny them to the occupying forces).
     
    I guess I see where you are coming from.
    My approach is not to get into "occupying" situation in the first place. "Enclave under siege" scenario.

    Unity of command/purpose is more of a problem for insurgents as there inevitably would be rival factions
     
    .
    Correct.
    Again, in Balkans, that was the problem easily fixed.
    Hehe...because Americans are an exceptional nation, you could be correct.

    Interestingly, you point to Jewish efforts.
    I like to point to Bosnian Muslims. Don't have reliable Web links. Those wanting to know about that would need to scrounge through Hague online material, transcripts in particular.

    Ah, my apologies.
    Let's keep this post, but, after glancing at the exchange between you and the other fellow I guess we have nothing further to say to each other.
    Moving on.
  44. @Twinkie

    10 000 persons, with firearms they own as we speak, can, in a city of 100 000 do it.
     
    10% mobilization rate is a fantasy, as is the idea that that many can be coordinated spontaneously.

    Besides, you don’t need that many armed to create a no-go zone for the occupying forces. 100-500 is sufficient, provided a substantial portion of the population is sympathetic (or at least fearful enough of the insurgents to provide intel and support and deny them to the occupying forces).

    Unity of command/purpose is more of a problem for insurgents as there inevitably would be rival factions. The Judean People’s Front/the People’s Front of Judea joke works, because it’s so very true.

    In real life, Haganah (later IDF) had to crush and absorb other guerrilla groups - most notably Irgun - before it could operate effectively and purposefully. See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altalena_Affair

    provided a substantial portion of the population is sympathetic

    My assumption is that anyone who talks about armed insurrection is either a schizophrenic who’s stopped taking his meds or an FBI informer. The latter is much more likely but the former is quite possible.

    Either way anyone who talks about armed insurrection is serving the interests of the SJW/globohomo establishment.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    My assumption is that anyone who talks about armed insurrection is either a schizophrenic who’s stopped taking his meds or an FBI informer.
     
    Or some overgrown teenager living in mom’s basement.
  45. @dfordoom

    provided a substantial portion of the population is sympathetic
     
    My assumption is that anyone who talks about armed insurrection is either a schizophrenic who's stopped taking his meds or an FBI informer. The latter is much more likely but the former is quite possible.

    Either way anyone who talks about armed insurrection is serving the interests of the SJW/globohomo establishment.

    My assumption is that anyone who talks about armed insurrection is either a schizophrenic who’s stopped taking his meds or an FBI informer.

    Or some overgrown teenager living in mom’s basement.

    • Replies: @dfordoom


    My assumption is that anyone who talks about armed insurrection is either a schizophrenic who’s stopped taking his meds or an FBI informer.
     
    Or some overgrown teenager living in mom’s basement.
     
    Yes.

    Or, most scary of all, an overgrown teenage schizophrenic off his meds, living in mom's basement, and working for the FBI.
  46. @Twinkie

    My assumption is that anyone who talks about armed insurrection is either a schizophrenic who’s stopped taking his meds or an FBI informer.
     
    Or some overgrown teenager living in mom’s basement.

    My assumption is that anyone who talks about armed insurrection is either a schizophrenic who’s stopped taking his meds or an FBI informer.

    Or some overgrown teenager living in mom’s basement.

    Yes.

    Or, most scary of all, an overgrown teenage schizophrenic off his meds, living in mom’s basement, and working for the FBI.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    living in mom’s basement, and working for the FBI.
     
    They wish they worked for the FBI.
  47. @dfordoom


    My assumption is that anyone who talks about armed insurrection is either a schizophrenic who’s stopped taking his meds or an FBI informer.
     
    Or some overgrown teenager living in mom’s basement.
     
    Yes.

    Or, most scary of all, an overgrown teenage schizophrenic off his meds, living in mom's basement, and working for the FBI.

    living in mom’s basement, and working for the FBI.

    They wish they worked for the FBI.

  48. @Twinkie

    10 000 persons, with firearms they own as we speak, can, in a city of 100 000 do it.
     
    10% mobilization rate is a fantasy, as is the idea that that many can be coordinated spontaneously.

    Besides, you don’t need that many armed to create a no-go zone for the occupying forces. 100-500 is sufficient, provided a substantial portion of the population is sympathetic (or at least fearful enough of the insurgents to provide intel and support and deny them to the occupying forces).

    Unity of command/purpose is more of a problem for insurgents as there inevitably would be rival factions. The Judean People’s Front/the People’s Front of Judea joke works, because it’s so very true.

    In real life, Haganah (later IDF) had to crush and absorb other guerrilla groups - most notably Irgun - before it could operate effectively and purposefully. See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altalena_Affair

    10% mobilization rate is a fantasy, as is the idea that that many can be coordinated spontaneously.

    For the scenario we are, I assume, talking about you could be correct for the former.
    Having said that, In Bosnia, for example, there have been dozens of cases where the rate was up to 80%. Four guys on one gun thing etc.
    Boils down to “us” vs “them”, or better, what’s going to happen to “us” when “they” establish control over “our” part of the territory. Now…..for the scenario, I assume, we are talking about, when you take a look how the guy from Charlottesville is being treated, well…..
    As for the later (coordinated) you could also be correct.
    But, again, in Bosnia, for example, that wasn’t the problem. We could argue what “spontaneously” means, of course.

    Besides, you don’t need that many armed to create a no-go zone for the occupying forces. 100-500 is sufficient, provided a substantial portion of the population is sympathetic (or at least fearful enough of the insurgents to provide intel and support and deny them to the occupying forces).

    I guess I see where you are coming from.
    My approach is not to get into “occupying” situation in the first place. “Enclave under siege” scenario.

    Unity of command/purpose is more of a problem for insurgents as there inevitably would be rival factions

    .
    Correct.
    Again, in Balkans, that was the problem easily fixed.
    Hehe…because Americans are an exceptional nation, you could be correct.

    Interestingly, you point to Jewish efforts.
    I like to point to Bosnian Muslims. Don’t have reliable Web links. Those wanting to know about that would need to scrounge through Hague online material, transcripts in particular.

    Ah, my apologies.
    Let’s keep this post, but, after glancing at the exchange between you and the other fellow I guess we have nothing further to say to each other.
    Moving on.

  49. @peterAUS
    No.

    An average city, in US, can, with ease, stage a successful rebellion which would shake US elites to the core. Could change the social and political landscape in a month.

    10 000 persons, with firearms they own as we speak, can, in a city of 100 000 do it. Tomorrow.

    Agree, somebody does need to organize all that. I am absolutely positive there are people, as we speak, in any of such cities, capable of that.

    The capability is there as we speak.
    There is no will to do so.

    At least for the moment.
    Within next, say, 10 years, we'll see.

    Please take the fed posting elsewhere.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Say it: "I want YOU to stop posting in the comments section of my articles".
    I'll do it, no prob. Just copy/paste the quoted above in your reply to this comment.
    Do it. Please.请
  50. @peterAUS
    BTW this topic pops up here every now and then with the same flow of comments so I'll keep it short this time.
    The people who believe it can't be done keep believing that. Let's agree to disagree and move on.
    For people who aren't sure and have, say, technical questions, ask away and I could try to answer. Disclaimer: won't answer some of them for obvious reasons.
    For people who believe it's possible, well.....the only way to keep discussing it is to meet in person, and after taking some precautions talk, for a day. After that simply know we are on the "list" and the game just changed from blabbing to serious. Like going to prison serious.
    On a serious note: as long as that topic is...ahm...discussed in places as this it simply ain't gonna happen.

    It’s not being “discussed” here. This is the kind of shit that after the next shooting happens and they find the guy once retweeted something from the Unz Review will get the whole thing shut down.

    This is the white ruralist equivalent to the gangbanger thinking he can beat the police force. They will keep coming until you and he are dead.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    It’s not being “discussed” here. This is the kind of shit that after the next shooting happens and they find the guy once retweeted something from the Unz Review will get the whole thing shut down.
     
    Precisely. Which is why I suspect that people advocating armed rebellion are almost certainly informers and agents provocateurs for intelligence agencies like the FBI.

    This is the white ruralist equivalent to the gangbanger thinking he can beat the police force. They will keep coming until you and he are dead.
     
    Yes. Childish and dangerous fantasies.
    , @peterAUS
    While I am still here

    ...get the whole thing shut down.
     
    Hahaha...I see. Of course.Gigs and such. Bit of gatekeeping too, but...anyway.

    This is the white ruralist equivalent to the gangbanger thinking he can beat the police force. They will keep coming until you and he are dead.
     
    Now,now, be a gentleman. Don't push for debate and discussion.
    I could post ten paragraphs reply to the above but, let's keep this civil. As the author here, try to lead by example. Keep being a nice civnat. Don't get at the level of that..."white ruralist". You know the saying "they bring you down at their level and beat you with experience.".
    Hehe..."ruralist" a? Haha....slipping here?
    Anyway, awaiting that copy/paste.
    All good.
  51. @Audacious Epigone
    It's not being "discussed" here. This is the kind of shit that after the next shooting happens and they find the guy once retweeted something from the Unz Review will get the whole thing shut down.

    This is the white ruralist equivalent to the gangbanger thinking he can beat the police force. They will keep coming until you and he are dead.

    It’s not being “discussed” here. This is the kind of shit that after the next shooting happens and they find the guy once retweeted something from the Unz Review will get the whole thing shut down.

    Precisely. Which is why I suspect that people advocating armed rebellion are almost certainly informers and agents provocateurs for intelligence agencies like the FBI.

    This is the white ruralist equivalent to the gangbanger thinking he can beat the police force. They will keep coming until you and he are dead.

    Yes. Childish and dangerous fantasies.

  52. @Audacious Epigone
    Please take the fed posting elsewhere.

    Say it: “I want YOU to stop posting in the comments section of my articles”.
    I’ll do it, no prob. Just copy/paste the quoted above in your reply to this comment.
    Do it. Please.请

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    But I don't have any desire for you to stop communicating, only that you stop insinuating that some sort of insurrection against the government is an idea worth considering. It's an incredibly reckless thing to do--and that recklessness has the potential of hurting other people in the virtual vicinity who want nothing to do with something so suicidal.
  53. @Audacious Epigone
    It's not being "discussed" here. This is the kind of shit that after the next shooting happens and they find the guy once retweeted something from the Unz Review will get the whole thing shut down.

    This is the white ruralist equivalent to the gangbanger thinking he can beat the police force. They will keep coming until you and he are dead.

    While I am still here

    …get the whole thing shut down.

    Hahaha…I see. Of course.Gigs and such. Bit of gatekeeping too, but…anyway.

    This is the white ruralist equivalent to the gangbanger thinking he can beat the police force. They will keep coming until you and he are dead.

    Now,now, be a gentleman. Don’t push for debate and discussion.
    I could post ten paragraphs reply to the above but, let’s keep this civil. As the author here, try to lead by example. Keep being a nice civnat. Don’t get at the level of that…”white ruralist”. You know the saying “they bring you down at their level and beat you with experience.”.
    Hehe…”ruralist” a? Haha….slipping here?
    Anyway, awaiting that copy/paste.
    All good.

  54. Still no “copy/paste”?!
    Probably a timezone difference.

    Anyway, while we are waiting, how about a simple question:
    Have you EVER, when thinking about “guns, 2nd, armed confrontation” and similar topics, thought about a rebellion against power structures in Washington DC (you know, the “swamp”) by a bunch of counties, even a state; Hell, maybe a couple of states, even? Just once?
    Be honest.
    Just “yes” or “no”.

    I’ll understand “no”. Lack of imagination is the core quality of alt-whatever as we speak.
    “Yes” is good too. You are just doing what you think is right. Can’t give proles some ideas, no no. Those “rural-whatever” of yours.Hahaha..white in particular, apparently.

    But, if you don’t want to ban my types (or can’t), well, maybe you shouldn’t write about such things. Guns etc.
    Stick to something less …useful….. for FBI types/snitches. You know, guys like me, apparently.

    Petitions are good. Voting too. I’d stop there if I were you. Even street scuffles in the land of free with zillons of guns in private ownership call for controversies and guys like me (provocateurs by consensus around ) working on our shekels, I mean bonuses.
    You do that and the gig is safe. Well, for now at least.

    • Replies: @iffen
    I don't know how long you could keep your powder dry, but in the US the only feasible model for what I think you envision would be a disciplined militia. It is a mistake to recruit guys who are willing to "fight." You will need to recruit guys who are willing to "defend."
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Yes, I've thought about rebellions against existing power structures. I'm a big proponent of peaceful political dissolution. Your likely response is that it can't happen. I'll grant that it's possible you're correct, but nobody has even tried. Let's get someone run for governor of a state on a platform of peaceful secession. Let's watch him win the election. Let's watch the will of the denizens of that state be frustrated by federal machinations.

    Then, after all that has happened, maybe we can talk. Until all that happens, though, talk of violent insurrection is really, really stupid.

  55. @peterAUS
    Still no "copy/paste"?!
    Probably a timezone difference.

    Anyway, while we are waiting, how about a simple question:
    Have you EVER, when thinking about "guns, 2nd, armed confrontation" and similar topics, thought about a rebellion against power structures in Washington DC (you know, the "swamp") by a bunch of counties, even a state; Hell, maybe a couple of states, even? Just once?
    Be honest.
    Just "yes" or "no".

    I'll understand "no". Lack of imagination is the core quality of alt-whatever as we speak.
    "Yes" is good too. You are just doing what you think is right. Can't give proles some ideas, no no. Those "rural-whatever" of yours.Hahaha..white in particular, apparently.

    But, if you don't want to ban my types (or can't), well, maybe you shouldn't write about such things. Guns etc.
    Stick to something less ...useful..... for FBI types/snitches. You know, guys like me, apparently.

    Petitions are good. Voting too. I'd stop there if I were you. Even street scuffles in the land of free with zillons of guns in private ownership call for controversies and guys like me (provocateurs by consensus around ) working on our shekels, I mean bonuses.
    You do that and the gig is safe. Well, for now at least.

    I don’t know how long you could keep your powder dry, but in the US the only feasible model for what I think you envision would be a disciplined militia. It is a mistake to recruit guys who are willing to “fight.” You will need to recruit guys who are willing to “defend.”

  56. @peterAUS
    Good work.

    I know you are one of the rare people around here "switched on" well enough.

    So, a question.

    What's your gut feeling about this:
    The very idea of any....ahm....how to put it, ah, yes, "politically inspired armed violence" (good enough?) is being brought up and shot down on sites like this for a specific, well thought out, reason.

    It starts as "blah...blah...guns/the Second"....escalates into some sort of "confronting the ZOG/NWO/whatever" and then, by very nature of this media, gets shot down as impossible/suicidal?
    Not by people ignorant about details (my take: around 90% of people on "alt-whatever"), not those scared about possibilities ("civnats" and overall nice people...) but, how to put it, "smart players"?

    And...hehehe....I mean, just funny, "they" very carefully prepare the current system precisely for such possibility/contingency Not that 90% of people around here register that, but that's another story?

    Makes sense?

    Which does bring up that good work of yours.
    There IS a way for smart people who believe it IS possible to talk about it, even in public. No prob.

    Demands two things: the guys on the same page as for "why" and, of course, knowing something about the topic. Say.....those who know inside out Battle for Fallujah, for example. Or similar stuff.
    Test guys, be honest. Have you (the guy reading this...) read the Marine (battalion) post-action report on the battle and consequent lessons learned. Yes, it's online. Read and understood? Really?
    Good, for a starter. A little starter, that is.
    Could you play, just on paper, both sides then and there?
    Really? From squad up to battalion level? Both sides? REALLY!?

    Now, the next step. NO, of course. That's the point when the public chat gets into "no zone".

    Hehe....makes sense?
    Don't worry if it doesn't.
    Back to personal self-defense and LARP-ing.

    All good.

    People who believe that whites in the US will “fight” to create a white carve-out are sadly mistaken. You need to understand that “The Narrative” describing the civil rights era is badly flawed, just like the current “picture” as presented by the media is flawed. The resistance to integration was mostly political and in some places, non-existent or half-hearted. The fire-bombings and such were a small part. Most importantly, violent resistance attracted a miniscule number of people and they had no support among the larger population. My point is that if white people were going to violently revolt it would have happened then, and it didn’t. Integration, voting rights and such were “accepted” by the white population.

    PS: Most of the violence was conducted by “white trash.”

    PPS: Run into a white enclave while being pursued by security forces and there will be many fingers pointing, “he went that way.”

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    I don’t know how long you could keep your powder dry, but in the US the only feasible model for what I think you envision would be a disciplined militia. It is a mistake to recruit guys who are willing to “fight.” You will need to recruit guys who are willing to “defend.”
     
    Getting onboard? That's something. Maybe there is hope for you civnats.

    Listen, if you want to follow that train of thought, as obviously I think you should, you'd wish to start the other way around.

    There is a territory where certain people live in a certain way of life. Tick.

    There is an external threat to their way of life. Tick.

    They try to addrss that threat by non-violent means. Tick.

    When that fails, they, the people there (or better, their leadership........) initiate process to confront the outside threat by force of arms. This element, leadership, is fundamental. 90 % of people are followers. You can have top scientist genius who is a follower. You can have a hardened con who is leader. Making sense so far?

    That group, LEADERSHIP, can spring up from ordinary people, in 24 hours if parameters are right.
    That group, then, addresses the problem. From keeping kindergartens working and trash being collected, to organizing as you pointed out, THE DEFENSE, of that territory.

    If that group is smart they'll do it by the book: FIND an ex-military guy with proper resume. In such a territory, I am sure you can pick up at least five. In my book the best, for that type of mission, I'd pick up one star General/full Colonel with experience in commanding combined arms groups. And, then, leave all to him. He'll recruit his own staff. They'll make the UNIT, plans etc. Select unit subunits commanders. They will...blah...blah...blah...
    And then the recruitment process starts, selection, training, terrain preparation, blah.blah..blah...Hehehe...it's all in online manuals. I'd focus on defense in MOUT/FIBUA but it's only me.

    Any person reading this with experience from battalion up knows exactly what I am talking about.

    Now, parallel to this, two other "arms" are being created: security and civil defense. Same principles as above. Any senior cop and civil defense guy will know exactly what and how to do.
    Makes sense?

    People who believe that whites in the US will “fight” to create a white carve-out are sadly mistaken.
     
    Maybe.
    Maybe not.
    Humans are finicky creatures.
    Things change.

    The very same Colonels who would've supported Ceausescu and crushed the revolt in 1985, switched side in 1989.

    And plenty of similar examples then and there:

    The very same Muslim warlord who organized the defense of Srebrenica enclave, in Bosnia, was a member of Yugoslav Special Police and personal bodyguard of Milosevic before "troubles" started.

    The Chechen who organized the defense of Grozny was a senior Soviet officer.

    Things change.
    People change. Sometimes within 24 hours.

    We could argue here all day about the likelihood of such a scenario in USA. Let's pass.

    Have you ever thought about this:
    In a certain environment, people will DEMAND proper leadership. Somebody will fill that void. Why not "us"?

    There was a brief chance for the change by civilized means when Trump got into office. I HOPED that the man would rise to the occasion. Such things happen if there is something in that man.
    He failed. Character thing; can't be helped. Back luck.

    Maybe next time "we" can have better luck.

    Now...hahahaha....look around "alt-whatever" sphere. Do you see anyone capable of that "lecture" above? Rising to that challenge? Would YOU follow them if such an opportunity arises?
    But, again, a lot of people are still comfortable enough and hopefull enough not to get on "our" side.
    Let's give it some time.
    Say........3 years? Five? I'd say, within 10 the most.

    People...are...finicky....creatures......
    , @Anounder
    It's cope. A sad amount of Dissident Righties buy into a narrative where Whiteys were more or less noble savages fooled by the Jew into letting Kunta Kinte live around them.

    When you ask a Negro what makes his ilk so dysfunctional, he'll blame Whitey in one way or another. Ask a poster on pol and you're start seeing yapping about the Jews doing it, dindu nuffin, etc.
  57. Young whites in some sense get it that they will be targets of the woke coalition and will need protection.

    Could waking up to the homosexual agenda be far behind?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    If the remnant of the moral majority doesn't draw a line in the sand with world war P then there is nothing it will defend, ever.
  58. @iffen
    People who believe that whites in the US will "fight" to create a white carve-out are sadly mistaken. You need to understand that "The Narrative" describing the civil rights era is badly flawed, just like the current "picture" as presented by the media is flawed. The resistance to integration was mostly political and in some places, non-existent or half-hearted. The fire-bombings and such were a small part. Most importantly, violent resistance attracted a miniscule number of people and they had no support among the larger population. My point is that if white people were going to violently revolt it would have happened then, and it didn't. Integration, voting rights and such were "accepted" by the white population.

    PS: Most of the violence was conducted by "white trash."

    PPS: Run into a white enclave while being pursued by security forces and there will be many fingers pointing, "he went that way."

    I don’t know how long you could keep your powder dry, but in the US the only feasible model for what I think you envision would be a disciplined militia. It is a mistake to recruit guys who are willing to “fight.” You will need to recruit guys who are willing to “defend.”

    Getting onboard? That’s something. Maybe there is hope for you civnats.

    Listen, if you want to follow that train of thought, as obviously I think you should, you’d wish to start the other way around.

    There is a territory where certain people live in a certain way of life. Tick.

    There is an external threat to their way of life. Tick.

    They try to addrss that threat by non-violent means. Tick.

    When that fails, they, the people there (or better, their leadership……..) initiate process to confront the outside threat by force of arms. This element, leadership, is fundamental. 90 % of people are followers. You can have top scientist genius who is a follower. You can have a hardened con who is leader. Making sense so far?

    That group, LEADERSHIP, can spring up from ordinary people, in 24 hours if parameters are right.
    That group, then, addresses the problem. From keeping kindergartens working and trash being collected, to organizing as you pointed out, THE DEFENSE, of that territory.

    If that group is smart they’ll do it by the book: FIND an ex-military guy with proper resume. In such a territory, I am sure you can pick up at least five. In my book the best, for that type of mission, I’d pick up one star General/full Colonel with experience in commanding combined arms groups. And, then, leave all to him. He’ll recruit his own staff. They’ll make the UNIT, plans etc. Select unit subunits commanders. They will…blah…blah…blah…
    And then the recruitment process starts, selection, training, terrain preparation, blah.blah..blah…Hehehe…it’s all in online manuals. I’d focus on defense in MOUT/FIBUA but it’s only me.

    Any person reading this with experience from battalion up knows exactly what I am talking about.

    Now, parallel to this, two other “arms” are being created: security and civil defense. Same principles as above. Any senior cop and civil defense guy will know exactly what and how to do.
    Makes sense?

    People who believe that whites in the US will “fight” to create a white carve-out are sadly mistaken.

    Maybe.
    Maybe not.
    Humans are finicky creatures.
    Things change.

    The very same Colonels who would’ve supported Ceausescu and crushed the revolt in 1985, switched side in 1989.

    And plenty of similar examples then and there:

    The very same Muslim warlord who organized the defense of Srebrenica enclave, in Bosnia, was a member of Yugoslav Special Police and personal bodyguard of Milosevic before “troubles” started.

    The Chechen who organized the defense of Grozny was a senior Soviet officer.

    Things change.
    People change. Sometimes within 24 hours.

    We could argue here all day about the likelihood of such a scenario in USA. Let’s pass.

    Have you ever thought about this:
    In a certain environment, people will DEMAND proper leadership. Somebody will fill that void. Why not “us”?

    There was a brief chance for the change by civilized means when Trump got into office. I HOPED that the man would rise to the occasion. Such things happen if there is something in that man.
    He failed. Character thing; can’t be helped. Back luck.

    Maybe next time “we” can have better luck.

    Now…hahahaha….look around “alt-whatever” sphere. Do you see anyone capable of that “lecture” above? Rising to that challenge? Would YOU follow them if such an opportunity arises?
    But, again, a lot of people are still comfortable enough and hopefull enough not to get on “our” side.
    Let’s give it some time.
    Say……..3 years? Five? I’d say, within 10 the most.

    People…are…finicky….creatures……

    • Replies: @iffen
    Get back to me when we go a few notches above the Balkan imbroglio. The US is a nation state, unified, more or less, at times, and we have been for a very long time. Yugoslavia was a pretend state put together by the PTB and Tito. If he was still alive it might still be a pretend state. Apples and oranges, and so forth ...
  59. @iffen
    People who believe that whites in the US will "fight" to create a white carve-out are sadly mistaken. You need to understand that "The Narrative" describing the civil rights era is badly flawed, just like the current "picture" as presented by the media is flawed. The resistance to integration was mostly political and in some places, non-existent or half-hearted. The fire-bombings and such were a small part. Most importantly, violent resistance attracted a miniscule number of people and they had no support among the larger population. My point is that if white people were going to violently revolt it would have happened then, and it didn't. Integration, voting rights and such were "accepted" by the white population.

    PS: Most of the violence was conducted by "white trash."

    PPS: Run into a white enclave while being pursued by security forces and there will be many fingers pointing, "he went that way."

    It’s cope. A sad amount of Dissident Righties buy into a narrative where Whiteys were more or less noble savages fooled by the Jew into letting Kunta Kinte live around them.

    When you ask a Negro what makes his ilk so dysfunctional, he’ll blame Whitey in one way or another. Ask a poster on pol and you’re start seeing yapping about the Jews doing it, dindu nuffin, etc.

  60. @peterAUS

    I don’t know how long you could keep your powder dry, but in the US the only feasible model for what I think you envision would be a disciplined militia. It is a mistake to recruit guys who are willing to “fight.” You will need to recruit guys who are willing to “defend.”
     
    Getting onboard? That's something. Maybe there is hope for you civnats.

    Listen, if you want to follow that train of thought, as obviously I think you should, you'd wish to start the other way around.

    There is a territory where certain people live in a certain way of life. Tick.

    There is an external threat to their way of life. Tick.

    They try to addrss that threat by non-violent means. Tick.

    When that fails, they, the people there (or better, their leadership........) initiate process to confront the outside threat by force of arms. This element, leadership, is fundamental. 90 % of people are followers. You can have top scientist genius who is a follower. You can have a hardened con who is leader. Making sense so far?

    That group, LEADERSHIP, can spring up from ordinary people, in 24 hours if parameters are right.
    That group, then, addresses the problem. From keeping kindergartens working and trash being collected, to organizing as you pointed out, THE DEFENSE, of that territory.

    If that group is smart they'll do it by the book: FIND an ex-military guy with proper resume. In such a territory, I am sure you can pick up at least five. In my book the best, for that type of mission, I'd pick up one star General/full Colonel with experience in commanding combined arms groups. And, then, leave all to him. He'll recruit his own staff. They'll make the UNIT, plans etc. Select unit subunits commanders. They will...blah...blah...blah...
    And then the recruitment process starts, selection, training, terrain preparation, blah.blah..blah...Hehehe...it's all in online manuals. I'd focus on defense in MOUT/FIBUA but it's only me.

    Any person reading this with experience from battalion up knows exactly what I am talking about.

    Now, parallel to this, two other "arms" are being created: security and civil defense. Same principles as above. Any senior cop and civil defense guy will know exactly what and how to do.
    Makes sense?

    People who believe that whites in the US will “fight” to create a white carve-out are sadly mistaken.
     
    Maybe.
    Maybe not.
    Humans are finicky creatures.
    Things change.

    The very same Colonels who would've supported Ceausescu and crushed the revolt in 1985, switched side in 1989.

    And plenty of similar examples then and there:

    The very same Muslim warlord who organized the defense of Srebrenica enclave, in Bosnia, was a member of Yugoslav Special Police and personal bodyguard of Milosevic before "troubles" started.

    The Chechen who organized the defense of Grozny was a senior Soviet officer.

    Things change.
    People change. Sometimes within 24 hours.

    We could argue here all day about the likelihood of such a scenario in USA. Let's pass.

    Have you ever thought about this:
    In a certain environment, people will DEMAND proper leadership. Somebody will fill that void. Why not "us"?

    There was a brief chance for the change by civilized means when Trump got into office. I HOPED that the man would rise to the occasion. Such things happen if there is something in that man.
    He failed. Character thing; can't be helped. Back luck.

    Maybe next time "we" can have better luck.

    Now...hahahaha....look around "alt-whatever" sphere. Do you see anyone capable of that "lecture" above? Rising to that challenge? Would YOU follow them if such an opportunity arises?
    But, again, a lot of people are still comfortable enough and hopefull enough not to get on "our" side.
    Let's give it some time.
    Say........3 years? Five? I'd say, within 10 the most.

    People...are...finicky....creatures......

    Get back to me when we go a few notches above the Balkan imbroglio. The US is a nation state, unified, more or less, at times, and we have been for a very long time. Yugoslavia was a pretend state put together by the PTB and Tito. If he was still alive it might still be a pretend state. Apples and oranges, and so forth …

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    Apples and oranges, and so forth …
     
    O.K.
  61. @peterAUS
    Say it: "I want YOU to stop posting in the comments section of my articles".
    I'll do it, no prob. Just copy/paste the quoted above in your reply to this comment.
    Do it. Please.请

    But I don’t have any desire for you to stop communicating, only that you stop insinuating that some sort of insurrection against the government is an idea worth considering. It’s an incredibly reckless thing to do–and that recklessness has the potential of hurting other people in the virtual vicinity who want nothing to do with something so suicidal.

  62. @peterAUS
    Still no "copy/paste"?!
    Probably a timezone difference.

    Anyway, while we are waiting, how about a simple question:
    Have you EVER, when thinking about "guns, 2nd, armed confrontation" and similar topics, thought about a rebellion against power structures in Washington DC (you know, the "swamp") by a bunch of counties, even a state; Hell, maybe a couple of states, even? Just once?
    Be honest.
    Just "yes" or "no".

    I'll understand "no". Lack of imagination is the core quality of alt-whatever as we speak.
    "Yes" is good too. You are just doing what you think is right. Can't give proles some ideas, no no. Those "rural-whatever" of yours.Hahaha..white in particular, apparently.

    But, if you don't want to ban my types (or can't), well, maybe you shouldn't write about such things. Guns etc.
    Stick to something less ...useful..... for FBI types/snitches. You know, guys like me, apparently.

    Petitions are good. Voting too. I'd stop there if I were you. Even street scuffles in the land of free with zillons of guns in private ownership call for controversies and guys like me (provocateurs by consensus around ) working on our shekels, I mean bonuses.
    You do that and the gig is safe. Well, for now at least.

    Yes, I’ve thought about rebellions against existing power structures. I’m a big proponent of peaceful political dissolution. Your likely response is that it can’t happen. I’ll grant that it’s possible you’re correct, but nobody has even tried. Let’s get someone run for governor of a state on a platform of peaceful secession. Let’s watch him win the election. Let’s watch the will of the denizens of that state be frustrated by federal machinations.

    Then, after all that has happened, maybe we can talk. Until all that happens, though, talk of violent insurrection is really, really stupid.

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    Yes, I’ve thought about rebellions against existing power structures.
     
    As any sane person would.

    I’m a big proponent of peaceful political dissolution. Your likely response is that it can’t happen.
     
    No.
    My response is: do you have plan B?

    I’ll grant that it’s possible you’re correct, but nobody has even tried.
     
    Interesting.
    Khm...Civil War?!

    Let’s get someone run for governor of a state on a platform of peaceful secession. Let’s watch him win the election. Let’s watch the will of the denizens of that state be frustrated by federal machinations.
     
    I do get your point. Measured, reasonable, civilized.
    You don't seem to be getting mine:

    T................I.......................M.............................E.
    IMMIGRATION.

    You approach this as an exercise in civility. Hahaha.........man. Don't you really know who your opponent in this game is?


    Then, after all that has happened, maybe we can talk.
     
    Yeah.
    As South Africans can talk. Or Serbs in Kosovo. Or Iraqis in Iraq. Or Lybians ...Syrians.....
    Ah, yes, Palestinians can talk all day about it. To be fair and balanced..hehe....Jews and Commies could also talk a lot after '33.
    To balance again, all those on Stalin list could talk a lot too.

    You really don't seem to get that the game will change?!? Are you really that.....ahm...civilized? You really believe that your current opposition, should they get true demographic majority, will treat you as you are willing to treat them as we speak?
    Really?
    See, that question is the only which matters. Demographics is destiny.
    If you don't get this there is no point talking. If that's the case here is a deal: I won't comment on your articles and, before my comments on those theads I'll put some disclaimer, as, say, "the author of the article strongly disagrees with me on fundamental issues". So, you'll be good.


    Until all that happens, though, talk of violent insurrection is really, really stupid.
     
    Hahahahahahahahah.................fine, fine.

    My take:
    You talk, smartly, about it a lot NOW. Hammer all details, know what to do and how to do it. Have it as Plan B to execute on a WEEK notice if necessary. And, yes, keep doing what you seem prudent. If it works, great. If doesn't, well.....................TIME.....will be of the essence. Seizing the moment.

    See, those concepts, time and seizing the moment, seem elusive for you guys. That's O.K. I am a true believer in free will. At the end all this will be a white dwarf after all; all roads lead to one place etc.

    And, to be clear, as things stay now, I am 90/10 % sure "my" side will lose.
    Hehehe..how to put it: the assessment of own forces leaves little hope for a successful outcome.

    That 10 % plus knowing how finicky humans can be, sheeple/lemmings in particular, keep me interested in human affairs.
    Otherwise, fishing wins, always with bits of spiritual search. Something like that.

    , @dfordoom

    I’m a big proponent of peaceful political dissolution. Your likely response is that it can’t happen.
     
    But it has happened. Imperial China just kind of died peacefully in its sleep back in 1911. As revolutions go the Revolution of 1911 was certainly no bloodbath. The foundations were just eaten away over a period of decades. It is possible to so thoroughly undermine a regime that it pretty much loses the will to live.
  63. @iffen
    Get back to me when we go a few notches above the Balkan imbroglio. The US is a nation state, unified, more or less, at times, and we have been for a very long time. Yugoslavia was a pretend state put together by the PTB and Tito. If he was still alive it might still be a pretend state. Apples and oranges, and so forth ...

    Apples and oranges, and so forth …

    O.K.

  64. @Audacious Epigone
    Yes, I've thought about rebellions against existing power structures. I'm a big proponent of peaceful political dissolution. Your likely response is that it can't happen. I'll grant that it's possible you're correct, but nobody has even tried. Let's get someone run for governor of a state on a platform of peaceful secession. Let's watch him win the election. Let's watch the will of the denizens of that state be frustrated by federal machinations.

    Then, after all that has happened, maybe we can talk. Until all that happens, though, talk of violent insurrection is really, really stupid.

    Yes, I’ve thought about rebellions against existing power structures.

    As any sane person would.

    I’m a big proponent of peaceful political dissolution. Your likely response is that it can’t happen.

    No.
    My response is: do you have plan B?

    I’ll grant that it’s possible you’re correct, but nobody has even tried.

    Interesting.
    Khm…Civil War?!

    Let’s get someone run for governor of a state on a platform of peaceful secession. Let’s watch him win the election. Let’s watch the will of the denizens of that state be frustrated by federal machinations.

    I do get your point. Measured, reasonable, civilized.
    You don’t seem to be getting mine:

    T…………….I…………………..M………………………..E.
    IMMIGRATION.

    You approach this as an exercise in civility. Hahaha………man. Don’t you really know who your opponent in this game is?

    Then, after all that has happened, maybe we can talk.

    Yeah.
    As South Africans can talk. Or Serbs in Kosovo. Or Iraqis in Iraq. Or Lybians …Syrians…..
    Ah, yes, Palestinians can talk all day about it. To be fair and balanced..hehe….Jews and Commies could also talk a lot after ’33.
    To balance again, all those on Stalin list could talk a lot too.

    You really don’t seem to get that the game will change?!? Are you really that…..ahm…civilized? You really believe that your current opposition, should they get true demographic majority, will treat you as you are willing to treat them as we speak?
    Really?
    See, that question is the only which matters. Demographics is destiny.
    If you don’t get this there is no point talking. If that’s the case here is a deal: I won’t comment on your articles and, before my comments on those theads I’ll put some disclaimer, as, say, “the author of the article strongly disagrees with me on fundamental issues”. So, you’ll be good.

    Until all that happens, though, talk of violent insurrection is really, really stupid.

    Hahahahahahahahah……………..fine, fine.

    My take:
    You talk, smartly, about it a lot NOW. Hammer all details, know what to do and how to do it. Have it as Plan B to execute on a WEEK notice if necessary. And, yes, keep doing what you seem prudent. If it works, great. If doesn’t, well…………………TIME…..will be of the essence. Seizing the moment.

    See, those concepts, time and seizing the moment, seem elusive for you guys. That’s O.K. I am a true believer in free will. At the end all this will be a white dwarf after all; all roads lead to one place etc.

    And, to be clear, as things stay now, I am 90/10 % sure “my” side will lose.
    Hehehe..how to put it: the assessment of own forces leaves little hope for a successful outcome.

    That 10 % plus knowing how finicky humans can be, sheeple/lemmings in particular, keep me interested in human affairs.
    Otherwise, fishing wins, always with bits of spiritual search. Something like that.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    The level of media power alternative views have now is unprecedented. It's an obvious reason they're trying to squelch it. Maybe the mid-2010s will turn out to be Peak Free Speech and things will inexorably decline, but maybe not.

    But trust and confidence in major media is at the lowest levels in recorded history and going lower. Trust in all the major establishment institutions are cratering. We are headed for an economic depression and possibly a currency crisis. Lots of potential opportunities are over the horizon.

    If you want to do an American version of the Suidlanders, by all means do so--but this is not the place for it.
  65. I just have a vague feeling that you can’t seem to truly understand the depth of (human) capability to inflict pain, misery, death, and destruction on another person, especially if that is perceived “the other”. “Nazi”, for example. Or “honky”. Or “racist”. You know who.

    I am getting the feeling you’ve never been even in a hard street unarmed fight.

    Have you ever seen men in power deciding the matters of life and death of thousands, including old and young non-combatants? Their demeanor, tone, body language….eyes?

    Have you ever had a friendly chat with a vicious killer over a drink?

    No need to get that grim and personal.
    Do you remember that reaction of The Bitch when she heard about the death of Mr. Quadaffi? Or another bitch statement about Iraqi kids.

    Those are the people you expect to be civil and play the game by the book you believe in.

    Not trying to be smart; just pointing to some possible gaps in the true understanding of humans and especially the game of power.

    Maybe something to think about, sometimes.

  66. @Marty T
    Young whites in some sense get it that they will be targets of the woke coalition and will need protection.

    Could waking up to the homosexual agenda be far behind?

    If the remnant of the moral majority doesn’t draw a line in the sand with world war P then there is nothing it will defend, ever.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    If the remnant of the moral majority doesn’t draw a line in the sand with world war P then there is nothing it will defend, ever.
     
    I don't know how to break the bad news to you but there isn't a moral majority any more. Not even close. Most people either embrace the Poz or they're indifferent.

    The moral majority today, if you're talking about a group actually prepared to take a stand if pushed far enough, is actually a moral minority. And a very small minority.

    Millennials will enthusiastically embrace World War P. Because, you know, love triumphs over hate. And the enemies of World War P are just hateful bigots.
  67. @peterAUS

    Yes, I’ve thought about rebellions against existing power structures.
     
    As any sane person would.

    I’m a big proponent of peaceful political dissolution. Your likely response is that it can’t happen.
     
    No.
    My response is: do you have plan B?

    I’ll grant that it’s possible you’re correct, but nobody has even tried.
     
    Interesting.
    Khm...Civil War?!

    Let’s get someone run for governor of a state on a platform of peaceful secession. Let’s watch him win the election. Let’s watch the will of the denizens of that state be frustrated by federal machinations.
     
    I do get your point. Measured, reasonable, civilized.
    You don't seem to be getting mine:

    T................I.......................M.............................E.
    IMMIGRATION.

    You approach this as an exercise in civility. Hahaha.........man. Don't you really know who your opponent in this game is?


    Then, after all that has happened, maybe we can talk.
     
    Yeah.
    As South Africans can talk. Or Serbs in Kosovo. Or Iraqis in Iraq. Or Lybians ...Syrians.....
    Ah, yes, Palestinians can talk all day about it. To be fair and balanced..hehe....Jews and Commies could also talk a lot after '33.
    To balance again, all those on Stalin list could talk a lot too.

    You really don't seem to get that the game will change?!? Are you really that.....ahm...civilized? You really believe that your current opposition, should they get true demographic majority, will treat you as you are willing to treat them as we speak?
    Really?
    See, that question is the only which matters. Demographics is destiny.
    If you don't get this there is no point talking. If that's the case here is a deal: I won't comment on your articles and, before my comments on those theads I'll put some disclaimer, as, say, "the author of the article strongly disagrees with me on fundamental issues". So, you'll be good.


    Until all that happens, though, talk of violent insurrection is really, really stupid.
     
    Hahahahahahahahah.................fine, fine.

    My take:
    You talk, smartly, about it a lot NOW. Hammer all details, know what to do and how to do it. Have it as Plan B to execute on a WEEK notice if necessary. And, yes, keep doing what you seem prudent. If it works, great. If doesn't, well.....................TIME.....will be of the essence. Seizing the moment.

    See, those concepts, time and seizing the moment, seem elusive for you guys. That's O.K. I am a true believer in free will. At the end all this will be a white dwarf after all; all roads lead to one place etc.

    And, to be clear, as things stay now, I am 90/10 % sure "my" side will lose.
    Hehehe..how to put it: the assessment of own forces leaves little hope for a successful outcome.

    That 10 % plus knowing how finicky humans can be, sheeple/lemmings in particular, keep me interested in human affairs.
    Otherwise, fishing wins, always with bits of spiritual search. Something like that.

    The level of media power alternative views have now is unprecedented. It’s an obvious reason they’re trying to squelch it. Maybe the mid-2010s will turn out to be Peak Free Speech and things will inexorably decline, but maybe not.

    But trust and confidence in major media is at the lowest levels in recorded history and going lower. Trust in all the major establishment institutions are cratering. We are headed for an economic depression and possibly a currency crisis. Lots of potential opportunities are over the horizon.

    If you want to do an American version of the Suidlanders, by all means do so–but this is not the place for it.

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    The level of media power alternative views have now is unprecedented. It’s an obvious reason they’re trying to squelch it. Maybe the mid-2010s will turn out to be Peak Free Speech and things will inexorably decline, but maybe not.

    But trust and confidence in major media is at the lowest levels in recorded history and going lower. Trust in all the major establishment institutions are cratering. We are headed for an economic depression and possibly a currency crisis. Lots of potential opportunities are over the horizon.
     
    Hehe....you mean in time, with careful, well-measured work. Slowly, gently, but surely. Sounds as...hahaha....a plan. You sure you don't work for "progs"? You know, on the subconscious level. I mean, that slip about "white ruralist" people was just...incompetent. As an author here you must do better. Smooth and sneaky. You know what I mean.

    If you want to do an American version of the Suidlanders, by all means do so–but this is not the place for it.
     
    I don't actually. You totally missed the point but that's O.K.
    I'd be more interested to get the other side thinking about doing the "Suidlanders" thing but that's not something your breed can understand.

    As for "this is not the place for it." says who? You? Passive/aggressive, a...hahaha?
    How about: go fuck yourself. I'll post here whatever the fuck I want until get banned. And if it happens right now I don't give a fuck. Got that in that thick head of yours?

    Pity it came to that language. Must be my "white ruralist" upbringing.
    Anyway, guess it's time to move on. I am sure you'd agree. Not that I'd give a shit but let's keep the appearances.
    , @dfordoom

    The level of media power alternative views have now is unprecedented.
     
    Wishful thinking. It might be true that traditional media has lost ground, but it's lost ground to social media. And social media is more Woke than traditional media ever was.

    And media power has never been so concentrated as it is now.

    Alternative views can be crushed completely. Just take a look at the way opposition to homosexual marriage and World War T was mercilessly shut down.

    The fact that 1% of the population gets its news from genuinely alternative sources is irrelevant. All that is needed is to keep the 99% happy with superhero movies, online porn, celebrity gossip and kitten videos.

    The big difference I see between the world I grew up in and the world of today is the staggering conformity of the world of today.
  68. Just had a moment of clarity.
    Thank you guys; even you who believe I should be put into lunacy asylum, or worse.

    The majority of people here, and alt-whatever, in general, believe that when non-whites outnumber the whites in the USA the game of politics will, fundamentally, stay the same as it’s been, say, since the Civil War at least. It will stay the “US way” of politics as it’s been for a century, at least.

    That’s why no sense of urgency, radical (pun intended) reassessment of methods to get and stay in power and similar stuff. Hehe…like, “no prob, we’ll just vote what we want at the next election”.

    Oh my.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    I do believe you are right.  I also believe that far too many think that the rules have not changed along with the population.

    When the realization hits that this has happened, though... placing no bets right now.
  69. @Audacious Epigone
    The level of media power alternative views have now is unprecedented. It's an obvious reason they're trying to squelch it. Maybe the mid-2010s will turn out to be Peak Free Speech and things will inexorably decline, but maybe not.

    But trust and confidence in major media is at the lowest levels in recorded history and going lower. Trust in all the major establishment institutions are cratering. We are headed for an economic depression and possibly a currency crisis. Lots of potential opportunities are over the horizon.

    If you want to do an American version of the Suidlanders, by all means do so--but this is not the place for it.

    The level of media power alternative views have now is unprecedented. It’s an obvious reason they’re trying to squelch it. Maybe the mid-2010s will turn out to be Peak Free Speech and things will inexorably decline, but maybe not.

    But trust and confidence in major media is at the lowest levels in recorded history and going lower. Trust in all the major establishment institutions are cratering. We are headed for an economic depression and possibly a currency crisis. Lots of potential opportunities are over the horizon.

    Hehe….you mean in time, with careful, well-measured work. Slowly, gently, but surely. Sounds as…hahaha….a plan. You sure you don’t work for “progs”? You know, on the subconscious level. I mean, that slip about “white ruralist” people was just…incompetent. As an author here you must do better. Smooth and sneaky. You know what I mean.

    If you want to do an American version of the Suidlanders, by all means do so–but this is not the place for it.

    I don’t actually. You totally missed the point but that’s O.K.
    I’d be more interested to get the other side thinking about doing the “Suidlanders” thing but that’s not something your breed can understand.

    As for “this is not the place for it.” says who? You? Passive/aggressive, a…hahaha?
    How about: go fuck yourself. I’ll post here whatever the fuck I want until get banned. And if it happens right now I don’t give a fuck. Got that in that thick head of yours?

    Pity it came to that language. Must be my “white ruralist” upbringing.
    Anyway, guess it’s time to move on. I am sure you’d agree. Not that I’d give a shit but let’s keep the appearances.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Yes, by persuasion rather than by banning.

    My concern is someone who I presume is a boomer (if you stated your age, sorry I'm unable to recall it) appears to be cryptically trying to prod young guys into doing something reckless that will ruin them. You've had decades, under more favorable circumstances, to do whatever it is you think needs doing. Why haven't you done so? If this is all just planning about what to do once the proverbial SHTF, fine, but please make it clear that is what you're discussing.
  70. @peterAUS
    Just had a moment of clarity.
    Thank you guys; even you who believe I should be put into lunacy asylum, or worse.

    The majority of people here, and alt-whatever, in general, believe that when non-whites outnumber the whites in the USA the game of politics will, fundamentally, stay the same as it's been, say, since the Civil War at least. It will stay the "US way" of politics as it's been for a century, at least.

    That's why no sense of urgency, radical (pun intended) reassessment of methods to get and stay in power and similar stuff. Hehe...like, "no prob, we'll just vote what we want at the next election".

    Oh my.

    I do believe you are right.  I also believe that far too many think that the rules have not changed along with the population.

    When the realization hits that this has happened, though… placing no bets right now.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    It's all about time and timing.
    Competent and resourceful use of time to get ready for the right parameters and good timing to seize the moment.

    "They" as we speak, have been using their time to stick the parameters in their favor. So far I guess they've been doing well.
    "We" haven't.

    Still, taking into account that x-factor of human lemming behavior both sides in this conflict have a decent chance if they time their moves at the end well.
    That is where I do, still, see the hope. That...hehe...10%.

    "They" are inherently incompetent. Eating their own will increase. The game of inclusiveness will dilute their ranks and file.
    At the same time more and more quality will get onto our side. Not in public, but their hearts and minds.

    So, in the end, all it takes is a great man (or a woman....), with core competent team and perfect timing. Such people can do that.

    Often, in such things, appearances can be deceiving.
    Look at Moscow '91. Everything was lined up as before, perfect.....on the outside. The coup I mean. And then it all crumbled, from inside.

    Not boring, for sure.
  71. @Mr. Rational
    I do believe you are right.  I also believe that far too many think that the rules have not changed along with the population.

    When the realization hits that this has happened, though... placing no bets right now.

    It’s all about time and timing.
    Competent and resourceful use of time to get ready for the right parameters and good timing to seize the moment.

    “They” as we speak, have been using their time to stick the parameters in their favor. So far I guess they’ve been doing well.
    “We” haven’t.

    Still, taking into account that x-factor of human lemming behavior both sides in this conflict have a decent chance if they time their moves at the end well.
    That is where I do, still, see the hope. That…hehe…10%.

    “They” are inherently incompetent. Eating their own will increase. The game of inclusiveness will dilute their ranks and file.
    At the same time more and more quality will get onto our side. Not in public, but their hearts and minds.

    So, in the end, all it takes is a great man (or a woman….), with core competent team and perfect timing. Such people can do that.

    Often, in such things, appearances can be deceiving.
    Look at Moscow ’91. Everything was lined up as before, perfect…..on the outside. The coup I mean. And then it all crumbled, from inside.

    Not boring, for sure.

  72. @Audacious Epigone
    Yes, I've thought about rebellions against existing power structures. I'm a big proponent of peaceful political dissolution. Your likely response is that it can't happen. I'll grant that it's possible you're correct, but nobody has even tried. Let's get someone run for governor of a state on a platform of peaceful secession. Let's watch him win the election. Let's watch the will of the denizens of that state be frustrated by federal machinations.

    Then, after all that has happened, maybe we can talk. Until all that happens, though, talk of violent insurrection is really, really stupid.

    I’m a big proponent of peaceful political dissolution. Your likely response is that it can’t happen.

    But it has happened. Imperial China just kind of died peacefully in its sleep back in 1911. As revolutions go the Revolution of 1911 was certainly no bloodbath. The foundations were just eaten away over a period of decades. It is possible to so thoroughly undermine a regime that it pretty much loses the will to live.

  73. @Audacious Epigone
    If the remnant of the moral majority doesn't draw a line in the sand with world war P then there is nothing it will defend, ever.

    If the remnant of the moral majority doesn’t draw a line in the sand with world war P then there is nothing it will defend, ever.

    I don’t know how to break the bad news to you but there isn’t a moral majority any more. Not even close. Most people either embrace the Poz or they’re indifferent.

    The moral majority today, if you’re talking about a group actually prepared to take a stand if pushed far enough, is actually a moral minority. And a very small minority.

    Millennials will enthusiastically embrace World War P. Because, you know, love triumphs over hate. And the enemies of World War P are just hateful bigots.

  74. @Audacious Epigone
    The level of media power alternative views have now is unprecedented. It's an obvious reason they're trying to squelch it. Maybe the mid-2010s will turn out to be Peak Free Speech and things will inexorably decline, but maybe not.

    But trust and confidence in major media is at the lowest levels in recorded history and going lower. Trust in all the major establishment institutions are cratering. We are headed for an economic depression and possibly a currency crisis. Lots of potential opportunities are over the horizon.

    If you want to do an American version of the Suidlanders, by all means do so--but this is not the place for it.

    The level of media power alternative views have now is unprecedented.

    Wishful thinking. It might be true that traditional media has lost ground, but it’s lost ground to social media. And social media is more Woke than traditional media ever was.

    And media power has never been so concentrated as it is now.

    Alternative views can be crushed completely. Just take a look at the way opposition to homosexual marriage and World War T was mercilessly shut down.

    The fact that 1% of the population gets its news from genuinely alternative sources is irrelevant. All that is needed is to keep the 99% happy with superhero movies, online porn, celebrity gossip and kitten videos.

    The big difference I see between the world I grew up in and the world of today is the staggering conformity of the world of today.

    • Replies: @iffen
    I think that what he's saying is true. Just take his comment section as an example. When and where in the past have people like "us" (the unwoke) been able to more or less effortless communicate and exchange views.

    You seem to think that "we" should try to capture the MSM in order to control the message and narrative being delivered to the 95%. That's a losing proposition.
  75. @dfordoom

    The level of media power alternative views have now is unprecedented.
     
    Wishful thinking. It might be true that traditional media has lost ground, but it's lost ground to social media. And social media is more Woke than traditional media ever was.

    And media power has never been so concentrated as it is now.

    Alternative views can be crushed completely. Just take a look at the way opposition to homosexual marriage and World War T was mercilessly shut down.

    The fact that 1% of the population gets its news from genuinely alternative sources is irrelevant. All that is needed is to keep the 99% happy with superhero movies, online porn, celebrity gossip and kitten videos.

    The big difference I see between the world I grew up in and the world of today is the staggering conformity of the world of today.

    I think that what he’s saying is true. Just take his comment section as an example. When and where in the past have people like “us” (the unwoke) been able to more or less effortless communicate and exchange views.

    You seem to think that “we” should try to capture the MSM in order to control the message and narrative being delivered to the 95%. That’s a losing proposition.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    I think that what he’s saying is true. Just take his comment section as an example. When and where in the past have people like “us” (the unwoke) been able to more or less effortless communicate and exchange views.
     
    I just don't think we should delude ourselves into thinking that it makes a difference, or that we're on the verge of winning the culture war.

    In fact from the point of view of our masters the great thing about alternative media is that it makes it much easier to monitor the dissidents.
  76. @iffen
    I think that what he's saying is true. Just take his comment section as an example. When and where in the past have people like "us" (the unwoke) been able to more or less effortless communicate and exchange views.

    You seem to think that "we" should try to capture the MSM in order to control the message and narrative being delivered to the 95%. That's a losing proposition.

    I think that what he’s saying is true. Just take his comment section as an example. When and where in the past have people like “us” (the unwoke) been able to more or less effortless communicate and exchange views.

    I just don’t think we should delude ourselves into thinking that it makes a difference, or that we’re on the verge of winning the culture war.

    In fact from the point of view of our masters the great thing about alternative media is that it makes it much easier to monitor the dissidents.

    • Replies: @iffen
    I just don’t think we should delude ourselves into thinking that it makes a difference

    Don't you think that it has potential? A person susceptible to un-wokeness could find ideas, references to books, and discussions here that would help him along the way. By analogy, I would have benefited greatly by having read The Blank Slate in 2002 rather than 2014. If one is skeptical of the narrative, it would be a good thing to find "normal" people who are skeptical as well.

  77. @dfordoom

    I think that what he’s saying is true. Just take his comment section as an example. When and where in the past have people like “us” (the unwoke) been able to more or less effortless communicate and exchange views.
     
    I just don't think we should delude ourselves into thinking that it makes a difference, or that we're on the verge of winning the culture war.

    In fact from the point of view of our masters the great thing about alternative media is that it makes it much easier to monitor the dissidents.

    I just don’t think we should delude ourselves into thinking that it makes a difference

    Don't you think that it has potential? A person susceptible to un-wokeness could find ideas, references to books, and discussions here that would help him along the way. By analogy, I would have benefited greatly by having read The Blank Slate in 2002 rather than 2014. If one is skeptical of the narrative, it would be a good thing to find “normal” people who are skeptical as well.

  78. @peterAUS

    The level of media power alternative views have now is unprecedented. It’s an obvious reason they’re trying to squelch it. Maybe the mid-2010s will turn out to be Peak Free Speech and things will inexorably decline, but maybe not.

    But trust and confidence in major media is at the lowest levels in recorded history and going lower. Trust in all the major establishment institutions are cratering. We are headed for an economic depression and possibly a currency crisis. Lots of potential opportunities are over the horizon.
     
    Hehe....you mean in time, with careful, well-measured work. Slowly, gently, but surely. Sounds as...hahaha....a plan. You sure you don't work for "progs"? You know, on the subconscious level. I mean, that slip about "white ruralist" people was just...incompetent. As an author here you must do better. Smooth and sneaky. You know what I mean.

    If you want to do an American version of the Suidlanders, by all means do so–but this is not the place for it.
     
    I don't actually. You totally missed the point but that's O.K.
    I'd be more interested to get the other side thinking about doing the "Suidlanders" thing but that's not something your breed can understand.

    As for "this is not the place for it." says who? You? Passive/aggressive, a...hahaha?
    How about: go fuck yourself. I'll post here whatever the fuck I want until get banned. And if it happens right now I don't give a fuck. Got that in that thick head of yours?

    Pity it came to that language. Must be my "white ruralist" upbringing.
    Anyway, guess it's time to move on. I am sure you'd agree. Not that I'd give a shit but let's keep the appearances.

    Yes, by persuasion rather than by banning.

    My concern is someone who I presume is a boomer (if you stated your age, sorry I’m unable to recall it) appears to be cryptically trying to prod young guys into doing something reckless that will ruin them. You’ve had decades, under more favorable circumstances, to do whatever it is you think needs doing. Why haven’t you done so? If this is all just planning about what to do once the proverbial SHTF, fine, but please make it clear that is what you’re discussing.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS