There was a time when real Americans looked upon violators of Rightful Liberty as nothing more than dangerous and predatory animals, and treated them accordingly.
Communists and Tyrants of all flavors, and their supporters, are existential threats to the lives, Liberties and happiness of peaceable Americans, and need not be suffered, despite whatever revisionist silliness about political "tolerance" you may have been "taught" in school.
One does not take time to consider the Cobra's ideology, nature, need for warmth and food from his special snowflake perspective, when he's curled at the foot of your baby's crib. One does not call an "expert" or apply for a permit to relocate the poor critter. One does not consult the Oracle with concern for the Cobra's family.
One does not seek permission of any man to do what must be done.
Real Americans still understand this Law of Nature.
The imminent sound of wailing and begging for mercy that will be heard across America (and is already beginning to rise upon the air) is nothing more than the application of Natural Law by real Americans.
Well OP has just stated that he is a Tyrant then because he it seems he want to take a few of us out that believe in RL...ReplyDelete
Yeah, I just read that particular comment from OP. I asked if he would care to explain/expand on what appears to be a statement in total opposition of Rightful Liberty.Delete
Since you brought it up, let me be clear. The rightful liberty quote was put forth by K in an attempt to garner support by all factions of the liberty/patriot movement to rally to the Three Percent Society banner. And it has in fact gained some traction in the community. Frankly, when it was proposed I was not in favor. In my opinion it is much too nebulous of a quote. While there is no doubt of it's cache' to attract recruits from a broad spectrum, there are certain factions that I want no contact or cooperation with i.e. anarchists. My post that you are referring to is directed specifically towards that faction. Old news really. I've said on more than one occasion that target transition times between communists and anarchists will be the same for me. I stand by the statement and will be glad to demonstrate it should the opportunity arise.Delete
I am a traditional constitutionalist. A soldier for the document as well as the culture that gave birth to it. So, even if you believe in "rightful liberty" yet you want to trash your flag, your Constitution and country in general, understand that you have enemy. He trains hard. And he is not alone.
Still waving that Corporate Rag er, I mean flag? I think restoration on a wide-scale is a dream filled with unicorns and pixie dust. Just seeing that thing kinda makes me want to fart or shit. The time to guard the reputation and honor of your virgin daughter is before she becomes a cheap dirty whore. But you are free to sacrifice yourself for the memory of what was once your little princess.Delete
Since YOU brought it up, let me be very clear...you are no traditional constitutionalist. Not even close. This place, and the whole "patriot" blogosphere, is chock full of "traditional constitutionalists," who believe in the founding principles of this country. You may have been one of those once--I don't pretend to know--but you sure ain't one now.Delete
Hell, even the modern so-called Objectivists are "traditional constitutionalists." So are most in the so-called Tea-Party, and so are a ton of vets. Hell, there are even some Republicans that are...though I doubt any are in major office.
Right or wrong, legal scholars or not, they're all "traditional constitutionalists" in any sane meaning of the term. You have chosen otherwise. Hopefully you'll change your mind, even if it's for the second time. But it's the same for you as it is for every other breathing soul now---every single one of us is going to damn well choose.
The way I look at it the anarchists just wish to be left to their own choices; whereas the communists/leftist/statists (of all stripes) wish to force their version of "utopia (hell)" on everyone. As long as no person uses force in an attempt to coerce me they have not violated the concept of Rightful Liberty.Delete
The DOI, Constitution and BOR are ideals, not mere words penned on parchment. I hold all of those ideals in the highest regard. I fly the Flag of this country as well as several others from the founding era proudly. Not because of what We the People have allowed this country to become, but because I believe in the ideals this country was founded upon. Those ideals are what is worth fighting for if need be, not words on parchment.
must be i'm not completely returned from left field due to the meds i was given yesterday for the 2nd surgery on my left eye - please, who is "OP"..?ReplyDelete
OutlawPatriot in a post over at WRSA...I thought he was one of the good ones but I guess I was mistaken... IFF as K tells us...I know he disagree's a lot with the no gov at all crowd but didn't think if they practiced RL he was still going to take them out...Sad That...Delete
OP is Outlaw Patriot.Delete
I'm off the internet for a few days and OP goes to war? WTF? ;)ReplyDelete
Can someone give me a link to the comment thread being discussed?
I don't like to psychologize, but probably he's just very upset with me. And Bill Buppert isn't calming him down. So he's got nowhere to go but what he knows...pretending that sheer brute force is going to get him out of this, instead of his mind.Delete
That's all any of this has ever been about---"according to our will."
If "traditional constitutionalism" means anything, it means trying to live in a society that stops thuggery from happening. Really, he's a good example of why it doesn't work---nothing can change a person, but that person.
Thanks, Lineman. I read the comment at WRSA, and Alan's explanation above. Here is my "interpretation" of what he was saying, based on the words written and my knowledge and experiences with Alan (I have met him several times.) Please note: I am not answering "for" Alan, only giving my "interpretation".
I think any Anarchist who remains within the boundaries of Rightful Liberty would remain off Alan's 'To Do' list. An Anarchist who doesn't try to impose his anarchy on me or subvert the system under which I choose to live is not picking my pocket or breaking my leg, either directly or indirectly - so he is not worth attention.
The moment he picks up a brick to impose his will, or actively works against the Rightful Liberty embodied in the DoI, USC and BoR (as ratified and intended) he becomes a player worthy of attention.
I would hope that is what he meant but his comment about target transition time leads me to believe not...Words have consequences...Delete
Here's why that won't get you out of the sticky wicket. The crux of Rightful Liberty--as well as the founding of this country--is that NOBODY gets to decide who may live and earn their way, and who may not.Delete
The battle is between Individualism and Collectivism...always has been and always will be, till it's over. If you engage force against a non-aggressor, ANY non-aggressor, then you have obstructed that person's action against his will, which is the very definition of violating Jefferson's Rightful Liberty.
The moment you treat ANY person as an Enemy by label, without that person threatening force against you, then you have violated Rightful Liberty, and of course become an enemy to those who seek Rightful Liberty AND who will defend it.
There is no way out of this conundrum with words. Period. Hey, you said it well yourself...
"The moment he picks up a brick to impose his will, or actively works against the Rightful Liberty embodied in the DoI, USC and BoR (as ratified and intended) he becomes a player worthy of attention."
More than attention, eh? You can't expect others to stand up for a principle unless you yourself stand up for it; this is Rule No. 1 in good leadership. Everything you wrote here after "embodied" is qualification and so doesn't belong. Either Rightful Liberty as stated by Jefferson is THE ultimate goal of this, or it's not. If it's "plus something," then it's not.
Here, I'll give it one last shot (so to speak). You write, "An Anarchist who doesn't try to impose his anarchy on me or subvert the system under which I choose to live is not picking my pocket or..."
Exactly right, and no improper qualifications there. The thing is, that's a two-way street. Neither may you nor anyone else impose THEIR choice of system on anyone else. Being the snookered-in Constitution of the USofA isn't some exception. PERIOD.
EVERYONE gets the system they choose. That's all this is about and there can be no exceptions but for those who intend to claim it from someone else.
"I think any Anarchist who remains within the boundaries of Rightful Liberty would remain off Alan's 'To Do' list. An Anarchist who doesn't try to impose his anarchy on me or subvert the system under which I choose to live is not picking my pocket or breaking my leg, either directly or indirectly - so he is not worth attention.ReplyDelete
The moment he picks up a brick to impose his will, or actively works against the Rightful Liberty embodied in the DoI, USC and BoR (as ratified and intended) he becomes a player worthy of attention."
He had it even better at WRSA, nearly perfect IMO, and I noted it. I didn't find it just now, but in looking came across this from your renegade soldier...Delete
"Truth be known, I will probably take out a few of Jefferson’s rightful liberty crowd. Just sayin’."
You down with that too? Would you like to delve a bit further into the topic of leadership maybe? You lemme know if so; I can do it written or live.
I'm always up for a discussion (live or written) on effective leadership.Delete
What one man says on a given day at a given time can always be taken out of context, no matter the specifics of the language. As you're wont to say, there are some 'Constitutionalists' who are collectivists/statists in disguise. Would it not to stand to reason that, 'a few of Jefferson's rightful liberty crowd' could be doing the same? And in doing so, could find themselves discovered and on the wrong side of someone who's IS a Constitutionalist or 'Rightfult Liberty' type?
It goes both ways. And by the by, not defending OP...he's more than capable of that himself. Only answering your reply to my 'well said'.
Well sure, a man is what he makes himself, and nobody can do it but one day at a time. Let's see 'em outlaw that one, eh?Delete
"Truth be known, I will probably take out a few of Jefferson’s rightful liberty crowd. Just sayin’."ReplyDelete
It has been demonstrated on this blog (and by me in-person to many people on many occasions) and across many other blogs by bloggers and commentors in this community, that there are many snakes in the grass. We have many people who claim, for instance, "Rightful Liberty" as their North Star, but then they reveal over time they are truly Statists or worse.
We have outright liars in the community who will only break cover for the masses when they begin putting bullets into skulls at their next Tribe meeting. Until then, they'll smile in your face while sizing up your kneecaps. Then we have Provocateurs and outright infiltrators who get invited to sit at the cool-kids tables all the time as well.
Many a Patriot is going to catch a slug behind the ear from someone they believe to be an ally.
There are a few who claim "Rightful Liberty" that I know personally who I also know to be liars working for hidden agendas - the Rightful Liberty house is in no less need of cleaning and maintenance than other houses.
'SNAKES"........ You are far too kind.Delete
"...the Rightful Liberty house is in no less need of cleaning and maintenance than other houses."ReplyDelete
Thank you. Lucky break too, cuz it turns out the only house a man can clean, is his own.
imho, the best quality anarchy has to offer is that due to it's lack of both cohesive structure and leadership, it fails rather quickly... everyone cannot be the boss nor do all possess the ability to be the boss - in many cases even of themselves... historical record of any long-term anarchy successes..?? nope... any of said would-be leaders given any real due remembrance..? nope... why is that..? because man is a being who must be governed due to his basic nature and his natural tendencies to mistreat others... for the sake of time and space, let me say this: my choice is to be minimally governed by those who 1) believe and demonstrate minimal interest in being governed and 2) will establish only those constraints which protect my(individual) rights as well as those of others... and yes, a stated, social code of whatever sort is necessary and some much wiser(than I and many more) who have gone before have provided us such a code: our Constitution and BoR...ReplyDelete
to break it down into more simple terms that even an anarchist can grasp: my property law is that there is no trespassing, hunting, tracking, scouting, trailing, trapping, nor fishing on my land without specific invitation. violations are considered threats against those who have proper right to my land and its use. I will defend myself and those properly on my land in every way necessary.