Western Rifle Shooters Association

Do not give in to Evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Baugh: A Nation Without A Country, Part VI - Stacking The Deck

From Tom Baugh:

In the previous five articles in this series, we saw how hypothetical secessionists might plan to strip the nationals of key resources. A secessionist might view certain national resources within their midst as bases from which the nationals might launch oppression. A key element of our hypothetical secessionist author’s plan is to use a nationwide crisis as a trigger condition for launching a coordinated multi-state secession movement.

As stated in the previous installment, this hypothetical scenario is gleaned from a study of history, and is an amalgam of historical fact, national security war-gaming, and discussions which might be happening at present in secessionist circles throughout the countryside. I present this alternative scenario in the form of a hypothetical secessionist’s handbook as an academic exercise to spark discussion. I address these issues only theoretically, but do not endorse any particular course of action beyond this academic discussion. We continue with our hypothetical Crisis Secession Manual in italics.

The crisis is the key. Without it, and the subsequent decimation of the leeches who would oppose us, we secessionists will find ourselves perpetually outnumbered. We will not precipitate this crisis, but we will use it to defeat those who would enslave us with it. Prior to the crisis, our best efforts to secede, or even vote secessionists into office, will be thwarted, and destroyed piecemeal. Guaranteed.

But in peacetime, pre-crisis, how does our hypothetical secessionist author propose that his fellows stack the deck of the sheriffs, mayors, city councils, governors and legislators needed to carry out this plan? It is practically impossible to elect liberty-minded folks to Washington, and have them remain that way for very long. There is a long list of reasons why, but these reasons are beyond the scope of this series. Suffice it to say that they get absorbed and power-drunk once they realize that the majority of the people in this country demand robbery and extortion by them from you.

But what about the local officials, including the sheriffs, mayors, city councils, state legislators and Governors? There is actually a chance to make a difference there. For one thing, the check-cashing leeches tend to pay far less attention to local and state elections. The checks available from those folks just aren’t that large. It is entirely conceivable for dedicated secessionists to field and elect some of these folks today. Hardly anyone will notice. Would you? Be warned, however, the same system which produces corrupt county commissioners will still be a force to be contended with.

But a nationwide, large-scale crisis will provide secessionists with an unparalleled opportunity. To exploit this opportunity, however, we must be ready. To this end, we must become involved with local grassroots organizations, not to carry posters, but to recruit those dissatisfied with mere posterboard. They are our allies in this fight which must come. From our number, recruited from whatever source, we may select our fellows who will one day serve in these key positions when the current officeholders quail in fear.

This sounds extreme on first reading, but I point the interested reader to the reaction of Kathleen Blanco, then-Governor of Louisiana during Katrina. She folded. During a crisis for which she should have been mentally prepared, she found herself totally out of her depth. Many of our current crop of politicians will do exactly the same thing. In such a state (of mind), these individuals will become frozen, particularly as their national nursemaids are busy elsewhere.

In this environment, many state officials may tender untimely resignations. Others may cite personal reasons, such as a desire to spend a little more time with their families. Others may be convinced of the wisdom of resignation. It is at this point that we have an opportunity to, in-extremis, populate these positions with pro-Constitution, pro-States’-rights, and pro-secessionist minds. I leave the details of implementing this necessary succession phase to others.

Regardless, we need to make sure that we have our Secessionist slate of potential office-holders prepared in advance. All others, dealing with the crisis as an interruption of their power, will be in chaos. We, seeing the crisis as the opportunity that it is, can be prepared accordingly.

As such, we need to convene in our various States, not to amend the Constitution, but to prepare our slates of future local and state office holders. The Constitution is fine; the problem there is that no one pays attention to it any more. No, our problem is in our local communities and our states; our problems surround us.

We need to know who our top three picks for each Governor are among our number. We need to identify two or three secessionist candidates for each spot in the legislatures. We need to identify who these people will appoint as the leadership of the State Guards. We need to know who our top two picks are for each sheriff and police chief, mayor and councilman. And then when the time comes, and the current office holders falter or resign in the face of chaos or reasoned encouragement, we had better be ready with more than just intellectual yak.

In effect, we need to have a shadow government in-being, waiting in the wings. This is not a subversion, but a preparation, by deciding who among our fellow citizens are worthy of being our official servants when the time comes. To decide, we need to consider key litmus issues, each of which reveals a candidate’s deep understanding of liberty in all its forms.

One such first litmus issue our hypothetical secessionists might choose is the drug war. No public policy has been more destructive to liberty in the name of good than this. Militarized police, no-knock entry, breeding grounds for individual and gang violence, criminalization of gun ownership, unlimited property seizure for mere proximity to certain molecules; all of these and more are the spawn of the drug war. All in the name of protecting a class of people who would do us all a favor by keeling over dead from an overdose.

Even those who call themselves conservatives get in on the act. Incredulously, these people, who howl in anguish if a locality seizes their property based on an increase in tax base, think that it is perfectly OK to teach you a lesson in obedience by making you susceptible to property seizure even if evidence is planted on you. Or perhaps it is done for the children; yet your children are more at risk from being caught experimenting than the experimentation itself. At least I know mine are, since I have taught them from an early age the risks and horrors of drug use. Some conservatives, who are against socialized healthcare, complain that if we don’t stop drugs then we’ll have to pay for the care of those who use them. Why? Why not just not write that check either?

I could go on and on about the drug war and similar victimless crimes, but the bottom line is that those who favor the drug war have a basic disconnect with the Constitution. People should be free to live their lives, and be free to destroy them. Or to smash their unprotected skulls on the pavement when they crash their motorcycle.

Another key litmus issue is debt-free currency. Much has been written about this topic elsewhere, but the bottom line is that our circulating currency should not be used as a means to transfer wealth to a small group of powerful men.

A third key litmus issue is gun rights. I’m sure I’m speaking to the choir here. And not just those weapons which are currently OK for us to own. We need to unroll the carpet quite a bit here. The concept of a militia isn’t just for farmers and pitchforks, it is for all the modern equivalents of pitchforks and muskets, too. See this article for more ideas about how to give the local kids something useful to do away from the Nintendo.

A fourth key litmus issue is civility versus liberty. In our cookie-cutter world, we’ve been bred to value civility over liberty. One pundit even refers to this as the Civilest of Wars. How absurd. I wonder, did our forefathers have their pinky fingers in the air as they shoved the bayonet into the heart of the agents of their oppressors? Someone who is trying to take my liberty does not deserve my civility. That I reserve for my patriot brethren with whom I desire to live in peace. Civility, like respect, must be earned, not demanded, and can never be placed above liberty. Which is why we must be tolerant of offense in others, rather than immediately rise to pass laws to restrict those we consider rude lest their chains be placed around our necks also.

A fifth key litmus issue is public versus private charity. True charity is an individual, private decision, and is tempered by judgment by the giver to determine worthiness of the recipient. Those who would implement charity by robbing us should never be placed in a position of public power. We all see where enforced public charity has led us.

With the appropriate litmus tests, which probe the liberty quotient of our fellow man during nothing more than casual discussions as we meet them, or read their online words, we can decide beforehand who is worthy to be our servants in office. And then, we wait, for our time will surely come.

It almost goes without saying that those of our fellows currently in these positions who have assisted the nationals in peacetime not be entertained as suitable candidates. When the nationals come to take your guns, watch and remember the names and faces of those in local uniform who assist them. Your time will come.

As a man of science and faith, the two being mutually supporting in my view, I am always eager to try experiments to probe the mysteries of Creation. Here’s another such experiment. When asked to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, make one little change: “... one nation, under God, (pause), with liberty and justice for all.” Don’t rush past the “indivisible” part, just pause, and by so doing emphasize its absence. Those around you may notice, and so this becomes a great ice-breaker. Most, believing the fairy tales they have been taught, might flee from you in panic. But you just might find a kindred spirit, too. A secessionist’s heart might be warmed by the prospect of a large gathering in which silence reigns supreme in place of that word. Or at least greatly diminished in volume, which in itself says much. We can only hope.

More likely, however, is that you will find, as I do, that many more than half of our fellow citizens worship at the altar of national supremacy. And worship at that altar so strongly that they chide you, or worse, for your treasonous silence. A few veterans, incredulously, may even lambaste you with two conflicting assertions: “I took an oath to the Constitution” and “how dare you talk about secession.” Secessionists need no lecture as to the conflict in these two assertions. That little experiment will tell you a lot about your fellow man, and the forces against which we are arrayed.

As we have seen in this series, secession is not a topic to be considered lightly. Among intellectual circles it has gained a certain amount of momentum, but we also need to be clear about the risks involved. Should we head down that path as these united States, we need to understand reality as it is, and not what we wish it to be.

Our hypothetical secessionist author might conclude his manual with the following flourish:

When our numbers have grown sufficiently, or theirs have diminished, leave not one square inch of ground upon which the nationals may land. Drain the swamps from which these reptiles slither.

Tom Baugh is the author of Starving the Monkeys, Fight Back Smarter. He is also a former Marine, patented inventor, entrepreneur and professional irritant.


Blogger johnnyreb said...

Excellent series, very informative and thought-provocing.

And sobering.

There is much to do.

February 18, 2010 at 6:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: The Pledge of Allegiance -- How do you get as far as "indivisible"? Don't you stop before "flag" and "United States"?

The revised pledge then becomes, "I pledge allegiance to... America, and to the the Republic... pause ... under god (if that's your bent)... pause,"with liberty..."

February 23, 2010 at 9:41 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home